".jr  ■■     '."  — •^^"■^.f-'r  .T*  *-■*»■*  ♦'^  "  •r,::r  i 


Mm  (Bpths  of  (£>hmth  pjntovg 


-^-         LIRRARV 


%. 


\^   r 


■  ■*  *  Vffc.'V— ntw'-''  ** 


^en  <g|»oc^  of  C^tc$  f  ififorg 


THE 
ANGLICAN   REFORMATION 


BY 


WILLIAM  CLARK 

M.A.  (OxoN.),  Hon.  LL.D.,  D.C.L.,  F.R.S.C 


MDCCCXCVIl 


/ 


Copyright,  1897,  ^Y 
The  Christian  Literaturb  Co. 


/<^v>^       LIBRARY.     ^^A 
((  ^UN  16  IDGO 


— .')_ 


CONTENTS. 


CHAP.  I. — The  Anglican  Chuech  before  the  Conquest  1 

CHAP.  II.— The  Norman  Kings  12 

CHAP.  III.— The  Plantagenets 21 

CHAP.  IV.— Wyclif  and  the  Lollards 36 

CHAP,  v.— The  Church  before  the  Reformation 49 

CHAP.  VI.— Precursors  of  the  Reformation — Colet, 
More,  Erasmus 56 

CHAP.  VII.— Early  Days  of  Henry  VIII 61 

CAHP.  VIII.— Henry  and  Catharine 71 

CHAP.  IX.— The  Supremacy 79 

CHAP.  X.— The  Religious  Houses 90 

CHAP.  XI.— Reformation  and  Reaction 100 

CHAP.  XII.— Edward  VI.  and  the  First  Prayer  Book,  122 

CHAP.  XIII.— The  First  English  Ordinal 147 

CHAP.  XIV. — Foreign   Influences   and   the   Second 
Prayer  Book 155 

CHAP.  XV.— Accession  of  Mary 185 

CHAP.  XVI.— The  Marian  Persecution 203 

CHAP.  XVII.— The  Elizabethan  Refdrm 248 

CHAP.  XVIII.— The  Consecration  of  Parker 265 

CHAP.  XIX. — Queen     Elizabeth     and     Archbishop 
Parker. 277 

CHAP.  XX.— The  Articles  OF  Religion 292 

CHAP.  XXI.— The  Advertisements 305 

CHAP.  XXII.— Grindal  and  the  Prophesyinqs 318 

CHAP.  XXIII.— Whitgift  AND  Puritanism 325 

V 


vi  Contents. 


CHAP.  XXIV.— RiciiARH  Hooker 350 

CHAP,  XXV.— Kino  James  I.  AND  Archbishop  Banceofx  363 

CHAP.  XXVI.— Archbishop  Abbot  and  Calvinism 383 

CHAP.  XXVII.— King  Charlks  I.  AND  Archbishop  Laud  391 

CHAP.  XXVIII. — The  Long  Parliament  and  the  Re- 
bellion   414 

CHAP.  XXIX.— The  Commonwealth 435 

CHAP.  XXX.— The  Work  of  the  Restoration 441 


"^^zz-~~^^.y^-ft^ 


/f<§^      LIBRARY,      ' 
JAN  If'   WOO 

PREFACE. 


^*. 


HE  story  of  the  Anglican  Reformation  has 
been  told  so  often  and  so  well  that  any 
new  laborer  in  the  same  field  can  hardly 
lay  claim  to  fresh  discoveries  or  novelty 
of  views.  All  the  incidents  in  this  great  drama  are 
so  well  known  that  there  is  little  probability  of  any 
important  addition  being  made  to  the  information 
wliich  we  already  possess ;  and  no  sane  judgment  on 
the  characters  of  the  men  who  shaped  the  course  of 
the  movement  can  be  expected  to  differ  widely  from 
the  accepted  verdict  of  history. 

The  writer  of  the  present  volume  lays  claim  only 
to  having  endeavored  to  state  the  facts  with  the 
greatest  possible  impartiality.  His  own  point  of 
view  is,  of  course,  Anglican  ;  but  he  trusts  and  be- 
lieves that  he  has  done  no  injustice  to  any  of  those 
whose  religious  opinions  are  different  from  his  own. 

In  telling  the  story  of  the  Reformation  in  Enghind 
he  has  done  his  best  to  make  the  successive  changes 
in  the  statement  of  doctrine  and  in  the  manner  of 
worship  intelligible  to  the  reader;  and  he  believes 
that  in  this  way  he  has  best  done  justice  to  the  aims 
of  the  men  by  whom  those  changes  were  promoted. 

It  is  not  the  plan  of  these  volumes  to  give  a  cita- 
tion of  authorities ;  but  those  wlio  may  desire  such 
guidance  will  find  it  in  Burnet,  Lingard,  Perry,  and 

•  • 

Vll 


viii  Preface. 

Moore.  Wherever  the  writer  has  been  conscious  of 
direct  obligation  to  previous  works,  this  lias  been 
indicated. 

The  volume  is  larger  than  the  writer  intended,  so 
that  he  refrains  from  printing  long  lists  of  authorities; 
but  these  will  be  found  in  the  valuable  posthumous 
work  on  the  Reformation  by  the  Rev.  Aubrey  Moore. 

To  the  Rev.  Dr.  Welch,  Provost  of  Trinity  Col- 
lege, the  best  thanks  of  the  writer  are  due  for  his 
kindness  in  assisting  to  revise  the  proofs. 

William  Clark. 
Trinity  College^  Toronto^ 
Michaelmas^  1897. 


THE  ANGLICAN  REFORMATION. 


CHAPTER  I. 

THE  ANGLICAN  CHURCH  BEFORE  THE  CONQUEST. 

HE  Anglican  Reformation  had  certain  fea- 
tures in  common  with  the  religious  con- 
vulsions which  took  place  about  the  same 
period  in  Europe,  but  it  was  distinguished 
by  other  characteristics  of  its  own.  In  Germany,  in 
Switzerland,  in  Scotland  there  was  an  almost  com- 
plete sweeping  away  of  the  institutions  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages  and  of  earlier  periods.  In  England  there 
was  not,  and  there  was  not  intended  to  be,  any  break 
in  the  continuity  of  the  Church.  Moreover  the 
changes  which  were  brought  about  were  revolu- 
tionary only  in  the  sense  of  throwing  off  what  was 
regarded  as  the  encroachments  of  unlawful  authority. 
The  English  Reformation  differed  from  the  Protes- 
tant Revolutions  almost  as  much  as  the  English 
Revolution  of  1688  from  the  French  Revolution  of 
1789.  It  is  not,  therefore,  difficult  to  understand 
that,  in  the  eyes  of  foreign  Protestants,  it  should  al- 
ways have  appeared  as  a  very  imperfect  measure  of 
reform. 
The  leading  and  predominant  idea  in  the  series  of 

A  1 


2  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

events  which  may  be  said  to  have  begun  in  the  reign 
of  Henry  VIII.  and  to  have  been  consummated  in 
the  time  of  Charles  II.  was  the  rejection  of  tlie  su- 
premacy of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  which  was  not 
meant  at  first  to  be  a  denial  of  his  primacy.  To 
those  who  took  part  in  bringing  about  the  inde- 
pendence of  the  English  Church,  the  work  in  which 
they  were  engaged  in  nowise  partook  of  the  char- 
acter of  rebellion,  but  was  rather  the  realization  of 
an  idea  which  had  alwaj'S,  either  explicitly  or  im- 
plicitly, been  operative  in  the  history  of  the  English 
Church  and  people.  England  had  never  recognized 
the  right  of  the  Pope  to  interfere  in  the  government 
of  her  national  Church;  nor  had  she  allowed  the 
members  of  the  Church,  unconditionally  and  with- 
out restraint,  to  carry  their  appeals  to  Rome.  In 
certain  cases  such  appeals  were  believed  to  be  con- 
ducive to  the  interests  of  justice  and  were  therefore 
allowed.  But  such  permission  was  by  no  means  uni- 
versal. 

It  is,  therefore,  obvious  that,  if  we  would  rightly 
understand  the  significance  of  the  English  Reforma- 
tion and  the  nature  of  the  changes  which  were  ef- 
fected, we  must  carefully  examine  the  early  history 
of  the  relations  of  the  Church  to  the  Roman  see,  and 
consider  the  circumstances  and  influences  under 
which  the  papacy  got  increased  power  or  was  com- 
pelled to  relax  its  authority  over  the  Anglican  com- 
munion. We  shall  then  be  able  the  better  to  under- 
stand whether  the  revolt  of  the  sixteenth  century 
was  the  assertion  of  a  lawful  liberty  or  the  casting 
off  of  an  authority  which  had  been  ordained  by  God. 


^'^ '  ,^.^*^f\M[/~. 


British   Christianiiy.  8 

The  introduction  of  Cliristiiinity  into  the  British 
Isles  must  have  taken  place  at  a  very  early  period, 
probably  in  the  second  or  even  in  the  first  century. 
But  the  legends  which  profess  to  relate  the  history  of 
this  event  are  of  no  value.  As  regards  the  question 
of  the  relation  of  the  British  Church  to  the  see  of 
Rome,  we  need  not  be  detained  for  a  moment.  It  is 
not  merely  that  there  was  no  connection  whatever 
that  can  be  traced ;  but,  in  fact,  the  claims  of  the 
Roman  see  were  hardly  heard  of  anywhere  before  the 
fourth  century.  When  the  Council  of  Constanti- 
nople (A.  D.  381)  assigned  the  first  place  to  the 
Bishop  of  Rome,  it  gave  the  second  to  the  Bishop  of 
Constantinople  as  being  the  Bishop  of  New  Rome. 
The  primacy  of  Peter  and  his  successors  does  not 
seem  to  have  occurred  to  them.  The  same  position 
substantially  was  taken  by  the  Council  of  Chalcedon, 
A.  D.  451,  two  years  later  than  the  invasion  of 
Britain  under  Hengist  and  Horsa.  Tlie  state  of  the 
British  Church,  therefore,  lias  no  relation  to  the  con- 
troversies of  the  Reformation.  It  is  with  the  intro- 
duction of  Christianity  among  the  heathen  Saxons 
that  the  influence  of  the  Roman  see  in  England 
begins. 

Tiie  Saxon  invaders  were  heathens  and  had  driven 
British  Christianity  away  to  the  West,  to  Wales,  to 
Strathclyde,  and  to  the  western  coast  of  Scotland. 
It  was  a  Roman  mission,  sent  by  Gregory  the  Great, 
headed  by  the  monk  Augustine,  which  brought  the 
Gospel  to  the  Kingdom  of  Kent,  whose  sovereign, 
Ethelbert,  was  predisposed  for  the  reception  of  Chris- 
tianity by  having  married  Bertha,  daughter  of  the 


The  Anglican  Reformation, 


Frankish  King  Charibert  of  Paris.  The  missionaries 
landed  in  597  in  the  Isle  of  Thanet,  where  Hengist 
and  Horsa  had  landed  in  449.  In  a  similar  manner 
Christianity  spread  from  Kent  to  Northumbria 
through  a  daughter  of  Ethelbert  having  married 
King  Edwin,  and  having  taken  with  her  Paulinus  as 
a  chaplain  to  the  northern  Kingdom.  The  first  in- 
stance of  a  collision  between  the  insular  tradition 
and  that  of  Rome  came  out  at  the  Conference  or 
Synod  at  Whitby,  in  the  year  664,  at  which  the 
question  arose  as  to  whether  the  English  Church 
should  follow  the  British  customs  or  those  of  Rome. 
The  principal  point  was  the  date  of  the  Easter 
Festival.  The  Britons  were  not  on  the  side  of  the 
Quartodecimans,  as  has  been  alleged,  since  they  kept 
the  festival  on  the  Sunday,  but  their  mode  of  cal- 
culating the  day  was  different  from  that  of  the 
Romans.  Wilfrid,  Bishop  of  York,  argued  on  the 
Roman  side,  setting  forth  that  they  followed  the  tra- 
dition of  Peter,  to  whom  Christ  had  committed  the 
Keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.  Colman,  the  advo- 
cate of  the  custom  of  lona,  could  plead  no  such 
authority  for  his  founder,  Columba ;  and  King  Oswi 
decided  for  the  Roman  use.  "  I  will  rather,"  said 
the  King,  "  obey  the  porter  of  heaven,  lest,  when  I 
reach  its  gates,  he  who  has  the  Keys  in  his  keeping 
turn  his  back  on  me,  and  there  be  none  to  open."  It 
was  the  turning  point  in  the  history  of  English 
Christianity.  However  we  may  view  the  legend  of 
St.  Peter,  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  Church  of 
England  was,  by  this  decision,  beneficially  connected 
with  the  great  western  communion,  and  came  to  par- 


Roman  Influence. 


ticipate  in  the  civilization  of  the  West  and  the  organ- 
ization of  the  Latin  Church. 

The  most  important  influence  iu  the  organization 
of  English  Christianity  was  a  Greek,  Theodore  of 
Tarsus.  He  was  sixty  years  of  age,  and  a  layman, 
when  he  was  sent  by  Pope  Vitalian  (A.  D.  668)  to 
be  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Theodore  resolved 
to  organize  the  Church  in  England  after  the  Koman 
model,  and  in  subdividing  the  existing  dioceses,  he 
came  into  collision  with  Wilfrid  by  consecrating 
three  new  bishops  to  act  with  him  in  his  diocese. 
At  the  National  Council  held  at  Hertford  (673)  the 
subject  of  the  division  of  existing  dioceses  had  been 
brought  forward,  but  nothing  had  been  decided ; 
and  Theodore  proceeded  to  carry  out  his  own  plans. 
The  diocese  of  York  extended  from  the  Forth  to  the 
Humber,  and  a  division  was  clearly  necessary ;  but 
Theodore,  for  whatever  reason,  did  not  consult  Wil- 
frid. Merely  obtaining  the  consent  of  the  king,  he 
divided  the  diocese  into  four  parts,  consecrating 
three  new  bishops  to  the  dioceses  of  Bernicia,  Lindis- 
fame,  and  Lindsey  (678). 

It  does  not  fall  within  the  scope  of  this  volume 
either  to  describe  the  work  done  by  Archbishop 
Theodore  in  the  organization  of  the  English  Church, 
or  to  do  justice  to  the  great  merits  of  Wilfrid  as  a 
devoted  and  laborious  bishop.  Here  and  elsewhere 
our  business  is  to  follow  out  the  relations  between 
the  see  of  Rome  and  the  Anglican  communion ;  and 
the  case  of  Wilfrid  is  one  of  considerable  signifi- 
cance. 

Wilfrid  determined  to  carry  an  appeal  to  Rome 


6  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

against  the  action  of  Theodore  and  the  King.  Both 
sides  were  represented  at  a  Roman  Synod  held  by 
Pope  Agatho  in  October,  679.  It  appears  that  Wil- 
frid here  dechired  himself  to  be  quite  ready  to  con- 
sent to  the  division  of  his  diocese,  when  it  was  nec- 
essary ;  if  only  bishops  should  be  given  to  him  with 
whom  he  could  live  side  by  side.  It  was  then 
decreed  that  Wilfrid  should  be  restored,  rmd  that,  in 
concert  with  the  synod  to  be  held  in  England,  he 
should  himself  select  his  three  suffragans.  These 
were  to  be  consecrated  by  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury, and  the  other  three  were  to  be  removed. 
It  was  also  proposed,  at  this  Roman  Synod,  that 
England  should  be  divided  into  twelve  dioceses ;  and 
that  these  should  form  one  province.  The  Roman 
Abbot  and  Precentor  John  was  sent  as  legate  to 
England,  to  cooperate  with  Theodore  in  holding  a 
synod  for  the  settlement  of  existing  controversies. 
Some  of  the  details  connected  with  the  Roman 
Council  are  open  to  question,  but  the  statement  here 
made  is  sufficiently  trustworthy.  For  some  reason 
Wilfrid  did  not  immediately  return  to  England,  but 
remained  in  Rome  and  took  part  in  the  Council  held 
there,  in  680,  on  the  question  of  the  Monothelite 
lieresy. 

When  Wilfrid  returned  to  England  and  required 
that  he  should  be  reinstated,  in  accordance  with  the 
decision  of  the  Roman  Council,  King  Egfrid,  of 
Northumbria,  presiding  at  a  great  assembly  of  the 
Kingdom,  (680  or  681),  was  so  far  from  yielding  to  the 
appeal  that  he  condemned  Wilfrid  to  prison  where 
he  remained  for  nine  months.     The  case  of  Wilfrid 


Wilfrid  and  Rome. 


must  be  admitted  to  be  of  great  interest.  The  see 
of  Rome  had  for  several  centuries  been  extending 
its  influence  over  the  West,  and  generally  with  ben- 
eficial effects.  Appeals  had  been  carried  to  the 
Pope  from  different  parts  of  the  Church  ;  but  the 
question  had  never  been  clearly  decided  as  to  the 
right  of  those  who  had  grievances  to  n?ake  those 
appeals,  or  of  the  Church  of  Rome  to  hear  them. 
It  would  not,  perhaps,  be  easy  to  say  exactly  what 
was  the  English  theory  on  the  subject,  although 
there  would  be  no  such  difficulty  as  to  the  Roman 
view.  On  the  one  hand,  it  seemed  to  be  generally 
recognized,  throughout  the  Western  Church,  that 
the  Roman  primacy  was  not  only  useful,  but  a  divine 
institution ;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  by  no 
means  conceded  that  any  one  who  wished  had  a  right 
to  carry  his  appeal  to  Rome  without  the  consent  of 
the  King,  or  that  the  King  was  bound  to  give  effect 
to  the  decisions  of  the  Pope,  or  of  a  Roman  Council. 
After  nine  months  Wilfrid  was  liberated  and  re- 
tired into  Mercia,  but  finding  no  peace  there,  he  pro- 
ceeded to  the  territory  of  the  South  Saxons,  where 
he  accomplished  a  great  missionary  work.  After 
five  years,  on  the  death  of  Egfrid  (686),  he  returned 
to  Northumbria,  and  administered  for  a  time  the 
diocese  of  Hexham.  Subsequently  Bosa,  the  occu- 
])ant  of  the  see  of  York,  was  induced  to  retire,  and 
Wilfrid  was  restored  to  his  former  position.  Even 
then,  however,  the  Bishop  of  Lindisfarne  was  not  re- 
moved, so  that  the  decrees  of  the  Roman  Synod 
were  not  carried  into  effect ;  and  Wilfrid  was  required 
to  acquiesce  in  the  arrangement  made  by  Theodore. 


8  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

This  he  seems  to  have  done  during  the  life  of  the 
Archbishop,  to  whom  he  became  reconciled ;  but, 
when  the  occupants  of  the  new  sees  died  out,  Wil- 
frid, by  degrees^  got  possession  of  nearly  the  whole 
of  his  old  diocese.  At  a  Council  held  at  Easterfield  in 
Yorkshire  (701)  Wilfrid  was  asked  whether  he  would 
acquiesce  in  the  division  of  his  diocese  by  Tlieodore. 
He  refused  and  again  appealed  to  Rome.  The  de- 
cision, although  substantially  in  favor  of  Wilfrid, 
was  not  wholly  satisfactory,  so  that  he  wanted  to  be 
allowed  to  spend  his  remaining  days  at  Rome ;  but 
the  Pope,  John  VI.,  required  him  to  return  to  Eng- 
land. At  a  Council  held  on  the  river  Nidd,  (706) 
it  was  decided  that  Wilfrid  should  have  the  see  of 
Hexham,  together  with  the  minster  of  Ripon,  so 
timt  no  attention  was  paid  to  the  Roman  decrees 
that  he  should  be  restored  to  his  see  of  York. 
Shortly  afterwards  he  died  at  Oundle  (709). 

Another  bOi^id  of  connection  between  England  and 
Rome  was  established  by  the  payment  of  Peter's 
Pence,  begun  by  Offa  of  Mercia  in  787.  This  King 
resolving  that  his  own  Kingdom  should  not  be  infe- 
rior ecclesiastically  to  Northumbria  or  Kent,  wished 
Lichfield  to  be  raised  tc  the  dignity  of  an  Arch- 
bishopric. Pope  Hadrian  sanctioned  the  arrangement 
on  condition  of  Peter's  Pence  being  paid.  Four 
bishops  of  Mercia  and  two  of  East  Anglia  were  made 
suffragans  of  Lichfield.  The  theory  was  that  a 
penny  should  be  paid  by  every  household  ;  and  a  sum 
of  ^201  9*.  was  paid  as  a  composition.  Under  the  son 
and  successor  of  Offa  this  arrangement  was  annulled 
and  the  sees   reunited  to  the  province  of  Canter- 


':■  i;  .'y.- 


Dunstan  and  Rome.  9 

bury ;  but  Peter's  Pence  continued  to  be  paid.  It 
should  be  rdded  that,  although  the  papal  sanction 
was  obtained  for  both  of  these  measures,  the  au- 
thority by  which  they  were  carried  out  was  that  of 
the  English  Synods. 

The  fact  that  the  great  St.  Dunstan,  when  made 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  (959),  applied  to  Rome  for 
the  pall  and  in  other  ways  promoted  the  extension  of 
Roman  influence,  is  of  considerable  significance ;  and 
may  enable  us  to  understand  the  manner  in  which  the 
Roman  see  obtained  its  supremacy  over  the  whole  of 
the  Western  Church.  It  was  not  merely  the  great 
authority  of  the  Eternal  City  and  a  very  natural  wish 
to  be  connected  with  it,  which  induced  the  bishops 
to  look  to  Rome  for  help  and  sympathy ;  although 
it  was  certainly  the  preeminence  of  Rome  that  in- 
duced the  early  councils  to  give  the  primacy  to  its 
bishop.  Nor  was  it  merely  the  spread  of  the  legend 
of  the  Petrine  supremacy,  although  this  alone,  Avhen 
it  came  to  be  held  as  an  undoubted  fact,  prevented 
the  papal  authority  from  being  thrown  off.  But  there 
were  other  considerations  which  made  union  with  the 
great  central  see  desirable,  and  even,  in  the  eyes 
of  mediaeval  ecclesiastics,  almost  necessary.  On  the 
one  hand,  the  Church  of  Christ  is  not  a  mere  na- 
tional society,  but  one  which  includes  the  whole 
race  of  man ;  and  it  is  impossible  to  doubt  that  a 
particular  national  church  is  liable  to  dangers  which 
might  be  warded  off  or  modified  by  fellowship  with 
other  Churches.  On  the  other  hand,  there  would 
certainly  arise  evils  of  no  slight  magnitude  from  the 
immense    power    and    influence    which    the    royal 


10  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

authority  would  exercise  in  a  national  Church,  if  not 
checked  or  corrected  by  some  spiritual  authority  from 
without.  In  our  own  days  both  of  these  dangers  are 
greatly  diminished,  the  first  by  the  easy  and  rapid 
communication  with  all  parts  tf  the  world,  and  the 
second  by  our  popular  government  in  Church  and 
State.  But  tlie  history  of  the  J  istern  Church  will 
amply  illustrate  the  evils  which  arise  from  the  dom- 
inance of  the  secular  power;  and  the  great  liberal 
Catholic  movement  which  took  place  in  France  un- 
der Lamennais,  Lacoraire,  and  Montalembert,  was 
a  distinct  religious  protest  against  the  Erastianism 
and  unspirituality  which  they  believed  to  be  in- 
volved in  Gallicanism.  Such  considerations  may 
enable  us  to  understand  how  the  Churches  of  the 
Middle  Ages  found  it  natural  and  necessary  to  seek 
for  close  union  and  communion  with  the  see  of 
Rome. 

It  was  not  merely  by  his  application  to  the  Pope 
for  the  archiepiscopal  pall  that  St.  Dunstan  manifested 
his  Roman  leanings.  He  did  so  also  by  the  favor 
which  he  showed  to  monasticism  andb}''  his  preference 
of  regulars  to  the  secular  clergy.  It  was  not  merely 
that  many  of  the  clergy  at  that  time  were  married  men ; 
but  many  of  those  who  lived  in  community  as  secu- 
lar canons  were  noted  for  the  irregularity  of  their 
lives.  Efforts  were,  therefore,  made  by  several  of  the 
bishops,  backed  by  the  authority  of  the  king,  to  put 
the  control  and  conduct  of  the  Cathedrals  into  the 
hands  of  the  Benedictines.  These  endeavors  were 
followed  by  a  certain  measure  of  success  ;  but  many 
of  the  chapters  remained  secular.     The  enforcing  of 


Regulars  and  Seculars.  11 

celibacy  among  the  secular  clergy  was  still  more  dif- 
ficult. Not  only  were  many  of  them,  as  now  in  the 
Eastern  Church,  married  before  their  ordination ;  but 
many  also  married  after  they  were  ordained.  When 
difficulties  were  found  in  the  way  of  prohibition  by 
law,  ways  were  found  of  different  kinds  for  removing 
the  married  clergy  from  their  posts.  As  the  Pope 
usually  found  his  firmest  defenders  among  the  regular 
clergy,  it  is  evident  that  these  measures  helped  in- 
directly to  confirm  the  papal  power. 

Edward  the  Confessor  did  more  than  any  other 
English  sovereign  to  bring  the  Church  of  England 
under  the  sway  of  Rome.  The  king  was  scarcely  an 
Englishman.  He  was  the  son  of  a  Norman  mother 
and  was  Norman  in  all  his  thoughts  and  habits  ;  and 
the  Normans  generally  had  great  devotion  to  the 
Roman  see.  Moreover,  Edward  himself  had  a  special 
devotion  to  St.  Peter,  and  resolved  to  do  everything 
in  his  power  to  increase  the  papal  authority  over  the 
Church.  In  honor  of  St.  Peter  he  rebuilt  the  great 
Church  on  the  Isle  of  Thorney  which  we  know  as 
the  Abbey  of  Westminster,  again  rebuilt  by  Henry 
III.  and  others.  But  within  eight  days  of  the  con- 
secration of  the  Church,  at  which  he  was  unable  to 
be  present,  King  Edward  died,  and  the  Witan  elected 
Harold,  the  Queen's  brother,  as  his  successor.  Har- 
old was  crowned  by  Stigand  who  had  been  elected 
irregularly  to  the  see  of  Canterbury. 


CHAPTEK  II. 

THE  NORMAN  KINGS. 

CAREFUL  consideration  of  the  relations 
subsisting  between  William  the  Conqueror 
and  the  papacy  will  enable  us  to  form 
a  fairly  accurate  notion  of  the  kind  of 
authority  then  conceded  to  the  see  of  Rome.  It  is 
at  once  quite  clear  tliat,  by  this  time,  the  power  of 
the  papacy,  religious  and  secular,  was  so  great  that  no 
monarch  could  afford  to  ignore  it.  When  one  sover- 
eign was  at  enmity  with  another,  he  felt  stronger 
when  the  Pope  was  on  his  side ;  yet  it  was  seldom, 
except  in  times  of  direst  need,  that  any  direct  power 
was  acknowledged  as  belonging  to  the  sovereign 
pontiffs.  William  the  Conqueror  gladly  availed  him- 
self of  the  support  of  the  Roman  see  when  he  was 
about  to  invade  England.  When  he  was  firmly 
seated  upon  the  throne,  he  fell  back  upon  customs 
and  precedents.  Certain  claims  and  privileges  he 
conceded  to  the  Pope ;  but  when  it  came  to  the  as- 
sertion of  any  rights  over  the  English  Crown,  Wil- 
liam at  once  made  it  clear  that  none  such  could  be 
allowed,  even  although  the  claimant  was  Gregory 
VII.,  the  mighty  Hildebrand.  William  and  Lanfranc, 
whom  he  had  brought  over  from  the  Norman  Abbey 
of  Bee  to  be  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  although 
both  eager  to  draw  closer  the  bonds  between  Eng- 
land and   Rome,  had  no  idea  of  surrendering  the 

13 


William  and  Gregory.  18 


liberties  of  the  English  Church.  When  Gregory, 
through  his  legate,  made  the  demand  that  William 
should  do  homage  to  him  for  his  Kingdom,  and 
should  pay  the  arrears  of  Peter's  Pence  owing  to  the 
papacy,  the  King  made  his  mind  on  the  subject  quite 
distinct.  He  was  ready  to  allow  the  one  request, 
but  not  the  other.  ♦* Homage,"  he  declared,  "I  have 
never  willed  to  pay,  nor  do  I  will  it  now.  I  liave 
never  promised  it,  nor  do  I  find  that  my  predecessors 
ever  did  it  to  yours.  The  money  shall  be  paid  more 
regularly."  William  also  declared  that  no  Pope  wjis 
to  be  recognized  without  the  approval  of  the  Crown, 
nor  any  letters  or  bulls  from  Rome  promulgated 
without  his  consent.  Moreover,  synods  could  not 
be  held  without  his  license,  and  their  decrees  were 
not  valid  until  he  had  confirmed  them.  Excom- 
munications of  royal  tenants  and  officers  could  not 
be  pronounced  without  the  authority  of  the  King. 
Never  was  the  royal  supremacy  more  clearly  and 
emphatically  declared  than  by  William  the  Con- 
queror, under  the  papacy  of  Gregory  VH.  Even 
the  King's  right  to  invest  a  bishop  with  staff  and 
ring — a  burning  question  between  the  papacy  and 
the  empire — does  not  seem  to  have  been  questioned. 
The  practical  effect  of  the  Norman  Conquest,  how- 
ever, was,  in  various  ways,  to  bring  the  English 
Church  more  completely  under  Roman  influence. 
The  displacement  of  Englishmen  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  Normans,  as  bishops  of  the  Church,  tended 
in  this  direction ;  as  did  also  the  greater  enforce- 
ment of  clerical  celibacy,  especially  by  a  canon  passed 
at  Winchester,  forbidding  matrimony  to  the  capita- 


"j^iw^j-^- 


14  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

lar  clergy.  Another  change  had  perhaps  even 
greater  importance — the  separation  of  the  civil  and 
the  ecclesiastical  courts.  In  the  English  Church  be- 
fore the  conquest  all  causes  had  been  heard  in  the 
same  courts  ;  but  now  they  were  separated.  William 
had  herein  no  thought  of  abandoning  any  part  of  his 
authority,  but  merely  wished  to  make  the  provinces 
distinct,  in  accordance  with  Norman  methods.  The 
change  led,  in  subsequent  reigns,  to  complications 
which  will  have  to  be  noted. 

The  conflict  between  St.  Anselm  of  Canterbury 
and  William  Rufus  was  chiefly  a  dispute  respecting 
the  property  of  the  Church.  William  had  kept  the 
primatial  see  vacant  for  four  years,  and  had  alienated 
some  of  the  lands  of  the  Church.  The  dispute  for 
the  possession  of  these  lands  became  a  very  bitter 
one.  Even  when  Rufus  got  the  Pope  to  send  the 
pall  to  him  that  he  might  convey  it  to  the  Arch- 
bishop, it  would  appear  that  it  was  rather  for  the 
sake  of  making  money  than  of  asserting  his  author- 
ity. When  Anselm  steadily  refused  to  accept  it  at 
the  hands  of  the  King,  the  latter  gave  way  by  having 
it  placed  on  the  altar  at  Canterbury,  from  whence 
Anselm  assumed  it.  But  the  controversy  over  the 
property  of  the  Church  could  not  be  settled,  and 
Anselm  went  abroad,  partly  to  lay  the  matter  before 
the  Pope.  In  his  absence  William  Rufus  died,  and 
Anselm  returned  to  England  (1100). 

The  dispute  of  Anselm  with  the  new  King,  Henry  I., 
was  of  a  more  serious  character.  Henry  was  a  man 
of  great  ability  and  of  very  different  principles  from 
his  brother.    At  his  accession  he  declared  that  he 


Anselm  and  Henry  I. 


15 


would  not  appropriate  the  goods  of  the  Church,  as 
his  predecessor  had  done.  But  he  had  no  intention 
of  relinquishing  his  rights  of  patronage  or  investi- 
ture. He  stood  upon  the  rights  which  his  father 
had  asserted.  He  would  have  no  man  in  the  King- 
dom who  was  not  his  subject,  and  Anselm's  refusal 
of  homage  was  practically  a  declaration  that  the 
King  was  not  his  over-lord.  When  the  King  in- 
sisted, Anselm  offered  to  abide  by  the  decision  of 
the  Pope,  which  was  not  easily  obtained,  the  Pope 
being  unwilling  to  concede  the  King's  claim,  and  yet 
afraid  of  losing  the  allegiance  of  England. 

In  Lent,  1103,  the  King  appeared  at  Canterbury  and 
demanded  that  the  Archbishop  should  do  homage  in 
the  customary  manner.  Anselm  refused,  set  off  for 
Rome,  and  remained  there  for  three  years.  On  his 
return  an  assembly  was  held  in  the  King's  palace  in 
London  (1107),  at  which  a  compromise,  sanctioiied 
by  the  Pope,  was  adopted.  "For,"  says  Eadmer, 
"  the  Pope  standing  firm  in  the  sentence  which  had 
been  promulgated,  had  conceded  the  matter  of  hom- 
age, which  Pope  Urban  had  forbidden  equally  with 
investitures,  and  by  this  means  got  the  King  to  yield 
about  investitures.  Then,  in  the  presence  of  Anselm, 
the  multitude  of  people  standing  by,  the  King  agreed 
and  enacted  that  from  henceforth  no  one  should  be 
invested  in  England  in  a  bishopric  or  abbey  by  the 
giving  of  a  pastoral  staff  or  a  ring  by  the  King,  or 
any  lay  hand;  and  Anselm  agreed  that  no  person 
elected  to  prelacy  should  be  debarred  from  conse- 
cration on  account  of  the  homage  which  he  should 
do  to  the  King."     Fifteen  years  later,  by  the  Con- 


16  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

cordat  of  Worms  (1122),  a  similar  settlement  was 
made  between  the  Emperor  and  the  Pope,  as,  in  fact, 
the  only  one  possible.  The  Church  had  become 
powerful  enough  to  assert  her  rights,  and  the  asser- 
tion of  them  to  this  extent  seemed  not  unjust  or  un- 
reasonable. On  the  other  hand,  the  Sovereign  could 
not  recognize  a  spiritual  peer  in  one  who  refused 
to  acknowledge  his  suzerainty.  Both  requirements 
were  met  by  this  compromise. 

One  other  work  lay  near  to  the  heart  of  Anselm — 
the  enforcement  of  clerical  celibacy.  All  previous 
efforts  in  this  direction  seem  to  have  failed.  Not 
only  were  priests  living  with  their  wives,  but  some 
married  after  their  ordination.  In  the  year  before 
the  death  of  the  Archbishop  (1108),  the  King,  carry- 
ing  out  his  designs,  convoked  an  assembly  of  bishops 
and  magnates  in  London,  at  which  it  was  decreed 
that  priests  who  should  continue  to  live  with  their 
wives  should  be  deprived  of  their  office  after  being 
pronounced  infamous. 

It  was  not  long  before  another  case  occurred  in 
which  the  royal  and  papal  claims  came  into  collision. 
After  the  death  of  Anselm,  Henry  kept  the  see  of 
Canterbury  vacant  for  five  years ;  and  when  Ralph, 
Bishop  of  Rochester,  was  elected  to  fill  the  vacant 
place,  a  deputation  of  monks  from  Canterbury  was 
sent  to  Rome  to  procure  the  pall.  The  Pope,  Pas- 
chal II.,  consented  in  a  very  ungracious  manner,  and 
at  the  same  time  he  wrote  an  angry  letter  complain- 
ing of  the  want  of  respect  shown  to  the  Roman  see 
by  the  Church  and  King  of  England.  They  held 
councils,  elected  bishops,  and  generally  acted  in  a 


Henry  I,  and  the  Popes. 


17 


perfectly  independent  manner,  sending  no  appeals  to 
Rome  and  referring  no  questions  for  the  papal  de- 
cision. English  ecclesiastics  were  sent  to  Rome  to 
explain  the  position  taken  by  their  Church ;  and  the 
Pope  responded  by  appointing  a  permanent  legate  to 
reside  in  England.  The  rumor  of  this  proceeding 
stirred  up  the  opposition  of  the  nobles  and  higher 
clergy,  and  the  King  refused  the  legate  permission 
to  enter  the  country.  The  Pope  had  to  submit:  he 
wrote  a  letter  to  the  King,  professing  that  he  had  not 
meant  in  any  way  to  encroach  upon  the  privileges  of 
the  see  of  Canterbury. 

The  same  assurance  was  given  by  his  successor, 
Calixtus  II.  Nevertheless,  he  consecrated  Thurstan 
to  the  see  of  York,  in  spite  of  the  King's  warning 
and  the  protest  of  the  Archdeacon  of  Canterbury 
who  was  present.  At  the  same  time  he  declared  the 
Archbishop  of  York  no  longer  subject  to  the  see  of 
Canterbury  (1119).  In  consequence  of  the  Pope's 
action,  Henry  forbade  Thurstan  to  take  up  his  resi- 
dence in  England.  When,  again,  Calixtus  made  up 
his  mind  to  have  a  legate  in  England,  the  King  gave 
him  permission  to  enter  the  country ;  but  explained 
that  he  could  not  receive  him  as  legate  without  first 
consulting  the  higher  clergy  and  nobles,  and  in  fact 
indicated  that  they  had  not  been  accustomed  to 
legates  in  England,  and  had  no  desire  to  make  a 
beginning.  The  King  and  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbury managed  to  get  rid  of  the  Pope's  represen- 
tative, letting  him  understand  that  his  master  had 
not  acted  well  towards  the  see  of  Canterbury. 

Soon  after  this  Archbishop  Ralph  died,  and  was 
B 


18  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

succeeded  by  William  of  Corbeil,  who  went  to  Rome 
to  receive  the  pall.  Thurstan  of  York  took  care  to 
be  there  at  the  same  time,  to  see  that  the  newly  ac- 
quired privileges  of  his  see  were  not  withdrawn. 
Both  agreed  that  the  questions  between  Canterbury 
and  York  should  be  decided  at  an  English  synod, 
presided  over  by  a  papal  legate ;  and  John,  Cardinal 
of  Crema,  was  appointed  to  this  post.  We  see  here 
how  the  quarrels  between  ecclesiastics  were  ever 
tending  to  give  more  power  to  the  sovereign  pontiff, 
just  as  happened  when  the  secular  powers  fell  out. 

The  two  Archbishops,  eager  to  conciliate  the  favor 
of  the  legate,  emulated  each  other  in  the  endeavor 
to  do  him  honor,  and  the  King  for  political  reasons, 
withdrew  the  opposition  which  he  had  shown  to  the 
earlier  attempt  to  introduce  legatine  authority. 
The  clergy  and  laity,  however  were  differently  dis- 
posed towards  this  innovation,  remembering  that "  all 
the  successors  of  Augustine  had  been  primates  and 
patriarchs,  and  had  never  been  placed  under  the 
dominion  of  any  Roman  legate."  In  spite  of  this 
the  legate  presided  at  a  synod  held  at  Westminster, 
September  9,  1125. 

The  canons  passed  at  this  synod  with  regard  to 
simony,  pluralities,  patronage,  and  the  like  were 
merely  a  repetition  of  those  which  had  been  made 
at  previous  continental  synods.  So  also  in  regard 
to  women,  priests  were  forbidden  to  liave  any  wo- 
men in  their  houses  except  mother,  sister,  aunt,  or 
any  one  with  respect  to  whom  no  suspicion  could 
arise.  The  relation  of  York  to  Canterbury — the 
very  question  which  the  legate  came  over  to  settle — 


Legatine  Authority.  19 


was  left  undetermined ;  in  consequence  of  which 
the  two  Arclibishops  betook  themselves  to  Rome,  to 
have  it  settled.  The  Pope  evaded  the  real  question, 
and  gave  a  decision  which  secured  an  increase  of  au- 
thority to  himself,  by  appointing  Archbishop  William 
of  Canterbury  his  legate,  and  as  such  superior  to  the 
Archbishop  of  York.  The  Archbishop  apparently  did 
not  see,  or  would  not  see,  that,  whilst  he  was  adding 
to  his  personal  importance,  he  was  undermining  the 
authority  of  his  own  primatial  see.  The  King  did 
not  seem  to  realize  that  another  was  silently  assum- 
ing his  authority ;  for,  whilst  the  Archbishop  was 
the  subject  of  the  English  Sovereign,  the  legate 
could  be  only  the  delegate  of  the  Pope.  From  the 
time  of  Stephen  Langton  this  state  of  things  con- 
tinued, the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  regularly  re- 
ceiving a  commission  from  the  Pope  to  act  as  his 
legate.  It  can  easily  be  imagined  how  such  an  ar- 
rangement left  it  an  open  question  whether  the 
Archbishop  was  exercising  his  own  metropolitical 
authority  or  was  acting  as  the  representative  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff. 

Henry  I.  died  in  1185,  and,  on  the  whole,  the 
liberties  of  the  English  Church  had  been  diminisheu 
and  the  influence  of  the  see  of  Rome  had  advanced 
during  his  reign.  At  its  beginning  he  had  been 
strengthened  by  the  support  of  Archbishop  Anselm 
in  his  struggle  with  his  elder  brother,  Duke  Robert 
of  Normandy,  for  the  crown  of  England;  and  to- 
wards the  end  of  his  reign  he  was  anxious  to  obtain 
the  support  of  the  clergy  for  the  succession  of  his 
daughter  Matilda  to  the  throne. 


20  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

The  reign  of  Stephen  was  so  full  of  confusion 
that  it  can  teach  us  little  on  any  legal  or  constitu- 
tional question  ;  yet  Stephen,  amid  all  his  difficul- 
ties, forbade  under  penalties  any  appeal  from  his 
authority  to  Rome.  He  went  so  far  as  to  inhibit 
Arclibishop  Theobald  of  Canterbury  from  attending 
a  council  at  Reims ;  and  when  the  Archbishop  es- 
caped across  the  channel,  he  drove  him  into  exile 
after  his  return.  But  the  weakness  of  his  govern- 
ment made  him  consent  to  a  reconciliation. 


CHAPTEk  III. 

THE  PLANTAGENETS. 

|HEN  Henry  II.  succeeded  to  the  throne 
(1154),  confusion  and  anarchy  were  almost 
universal  in  Church  and  in  State;  and  the 
first  business  of  the  King  was  to  restore 
the  reign  of  law  and  order.  In  doing  so,  he  found 
the  course  of  justice  impeded  by  feudal  and  clerical 
privileges  of  all  kinds ;  and  the  King  resolved  that 
all  breakers  of  the  law  of  the  land  should  answer  for 
their  offences  before  the  ordinary  courts.  Any  vio- 
lation of  ecclesiastical  law,  he  argued,  was  rightly 
examined  before  the  Church  courts;  but  a  crime 
committed  against  person  or  property  should  be  con- 
sidered before  a  civil  tribunal.  Whilst  Thomas 
Becket  was  merely  Archdeacon  of  Canterbury  and 
King's  Chancellor,  he  gave  to  his  sovereign  his  help 
in  carrying  these  measures  into  effect.  When  he  be- 
came a  Priest  and  an  Archbishop  (1162),  he  began 
to  see  that  his  duties  to  the  Church  forbade  such 
compliance. 

The  nature  of  the  conflict  between  Henry  II.  and 
Archbishop  Thomas  Becket  will  be  quite  intelligible, 
if  we  consider  the  point  of  view  of  the  two  men. 
If  we  merely  or  chiefly  occupy  ourselves  with  the 
violence  of  the  King  and  the  obstinate  wilfulness  of 
the  Archbishop,  we  shall  be  dealing  with  the  mere 

81 


22  The  An(jlican  Reformation. 

accidents  and  not  with  the  essential  question.^  The 
King  was  resolved  on  dealing  even-handed  justice  to 
all  alike ;  and  to  him  it  seemed  a  monstrous  thing 
that  a  murderer  should  escape  the  punishment  of 
death  by  pleading  benefit  of  clergy,  and  claiming 
to  be  tried  by  an  ecclesiastical  court.  Here,  it  must 
be  admitted,  the  verdict  of  history  has  been  given 
to  the  King.  On  the  other  hand,  Becket  was  aware 
of  the  danger  of  the  encroachment  of  the  royal  au- 
thority into  every  domain,  so  as  to  endanger  the  free 
action  of  the  Church  and  the  Episcopate.  Both 
were  perfectly  sincere ;  and  each,  from  his  own  point 
of  view,  had  a  good  case. 

It  was  not  long  before  Becket  came  into  collision 
with  the  King;  but  it  was  the  passing  of  the  Consti- 
tutions of  Clarendon  (A.  D.  1164)  that  brought  the 
dispute  to  a  distinct  issue.  These  Constitutions 
were  a  sequel  to  the  Charter  of  Henry  I.  and  a  kind 
of  anticipation  of  the  great  Charter  of  John ;  and 
were  intended  not  to  introduce  any  new  custom  or 
regulation,  but  to  set  forth  the  actual  law  of  the 
English  Church.  Among  other  provisions  they  en- 
acted that  clerics  convicted  of  crime  in  the  ecclesias- 
tical court  were  not  to  be  protected  by  the  Church ; 
that  appeals  were  to  be  settled  in  the  Archbishop's 
court  by  precept  of  the  King,  and  to  go  no  further 
without  the  King's  consent;  that  no  archbishops, 
bishops,  or   parsons  should  go  out  of  the  kingdom 

•The  reader  could  hardly  find  a  better  guide  to  the  real  nature 
of  the  controversy  than  Lord  Tennyson's  great  play  of  Becket. 
The  struggles  of  Becket  are  strikingly  set  forth.  The  great  de- 
signs of  the  King  are  declared  in  his  speech  at  Northampton ;  and 
the  development  of  the  tragedy  is  given  with  fairness  and  power. 


Henry  II.  and  Bechet.  23 


without  permission  of  the  King ;  that  all  of  the  superior 
and  beneficed  clergy  who  held  of  the  King  in  chief, 
should  hold  their  possessions  by  barony,  and  do  all 
rights  and  customs  royal  as  other  barons;  that,  when 
Archbishoprics,  bishoprics,  abbacies,  or  priories  were 
vacant,  the  rents  of  them  should  go  to  the  King. 

Most  of  these  provisions  had  been  fully  recognized 
as  parts  of  the  law  of  England,  although  some  de- 
partures from  them  had  occurred.  For  example, 
appeals  to  Rome  had  never  been  thought  admissible 
without  the  sanction  of  the  King,  yet  they  had  been 
carried  thither.  On  the  other  hand,  the  reversal  to 
the  crown  of  the  incomes  of  the  higher  clergy,  dur- 
ing the  vacancy  of  their  benefices,  seems  to  have 
been  acted  upon,  as  part  of  the  feudal  system,  with- 
out there  being  any  legal  sanction  for  the  practice. 
Becljet  at  first  gave  his  assent  to  the  Constitutions 
of  Clarendon ;  but  finally,  at  the  Council  of  North- 
ampton, he  refused  to  aflBx  his  seal  to  them  ;  appar- 
ently holding  that,  whilst  he  might  personally  accept 
these  laws,  for  which  he  afterwards  expressed  the 
deepest  sorrow,  he  would  not  commit  the  Church  to 
them. 

The  struggle  was  not  immediately  and  directly 
between  the  royal  and  the  papal  power.  At  first, 
indeed,  Becket  was  condemned  for  his  obstinacy  as 
much  by  the  Church  as  by  the  State.  Not  only  the 
King  of  France  (Louis  VII.)  and  the  majority  of  the 
English  Bishops  sided  against  him;  but  even  the 
Pope  (Alexander  III.)  advised  him  to  yield  to  the 
wishes  of  the  King.  It  was  the  murder  of  the  great 
Archbishop  which  gained  for  his  side  the  victory 


24  lite  Anglican  Reformation. 

wliicli  could  hardly  have  been  secured  by  his  per- 
sistency and  intrepidity  in  life.  The  popular  senti- 
ment saw  in  tlie  murder  of  Becket  a  martyrdom ; 
and  St.  Thomas  of  Canterbury  became  the  favorite 
Saint '  of  England  down  to  the  period  of  the  Reforma- 
tion. Whether  the  King  intended  to  suggest  the 
murder  or  not,  he  had  to  submit  to  public  penance 
for  his  part  in  the  persecution  of  the  Archbishop. 
The  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  could  not  be  enforced, 
and  there  was  hardly  any  restraint  imposed  upon 
appeals  to  Rome.  The  clergy  were  allowed  to  be 
tried  in  their  own  courts.  Thus,  as  so  often  happens, 
the  violence  of  the  party  whicli  was  substantially  in 
the  right  defeated  the  righteous  aims  which  they  had 
before  them  ;  and  it  was  not  merely  tlie  aggrandize- 
ment of  the  papal  power  that  resulted  from  this  vio- 
lence and  the  crime  in  which  it  culminated,  but 
justice  came  to  be  administered  far  less  thoroughly 
and  equitably. 

No  one  who  takes  an  impartial  view  of  mediaeval 
history  will  hastily  decide  that  the  papal  authority 
w^as  an  unmixed  evil.  On  the  contrary  it  was  some- 
times, with  all  drawbacks,  almost  a  necessity.  A 
regal  autocracy  was  not  a  form  of  government  that 
could  be  trusted  to  do  the  best  for  all  classes  in  the 
community;  and  although  the  barons  formed  a 
serious  check  on  the  royal  power,  yet  sometimes  the 
interests  of  the  King  and  the  nobles  seemed  to  unite 
against    the   Church,  and    even    when    they   were 

'An  interesting  testimony  to  this  is  found  in  the  fact  that 
Thomas  is  the  second  commonest  man's  name  in  Engluud,  John 
being,  in  all  Christian  countries,  the  most  common. 


Case  of  Stephen  Langton.  25 

opposed,  the  rights  of  the  people  at  hirge  were  not 
much  considered  by  either.  The  cross  in  tlie  hand 
of  tlie  Priest  was  often  tlie  sole  protection  which  the 
serf  liad  against  the  sceptre  or  the  sword. 

Tlie  papal  anthority,  however,  was  not  at  first  as- 
serted directly,  and  as  a  theory.  Pretexts  were 
found  for  intervenilon  when  disputes  arose  between 
the  King  and  the  Church,  and  finally,  as  has  been 
pointed  out,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  became 
ordinary  legate,  so  that  it  was  difficult  to  distinguish 
between  his  acts  as  Metropolitan  and  those  of  the 
representative  of  the  Sovereign  Pontiff. 

One  of  tlie  most  serious  disputes  was  that  which 
arose  on  the  death  of  Archbishop  Huber  of  Canter- 
bury in  1205.  Some  of  the  monks  elected  Reginald, 
then  sub-prior,  to  the  vacant  see ;  but,  getting 
alarmed  at  the  anger  of  the  King,  the  general  body 
chose  de  Grey,  then  Bishop  of  Norwich,  the  royal 
nominee.  When  the  matter  was  explained  to  the 
Pope  (Innocent  III.)  by  the  monks  who  had  been 
sent  to  Rome  for  the  purpose,  his  Holiness  saw  his 
opportunity,  set  aside  both  of  the  candidates,  and  in- 
duced the  monks  to  elect  Cardinal  Stephen  Langton, 
an  Englishman  resident  at  Rome.  When  King  John 
heard  of  the  consecration  of  Stephen  by  the  Pope 
(June  17,  1207),  he  banished  tlie  monks  of  Christ 
Church,  Canterbury,  and  vowed  vengeance  against 
the  Romans.  It  was  no  wonder.  Such  an  invasion 
of  the  rights  of  the  English  Crown  was  unprece- 
dented; and  another  King  who  should  have  had  less 
ability  than  John,  who  could  have  counted  upon  the 
support  of  his  people,  might  have  succeeded  in  his 


26  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

resistance.  The  Pope  knew  too  well  how  little 
power  was  possessed  by  John.  It  was  indeed  an  un- 
equal combat.  The  papal  power  was  at  its  highest 
point  in  the  western  conscience :  it  was  at  this  time 
exercised  by  a  man  of  great  ability  and  of  imperious 
will ;  and  over  against  tliis  power  was  a  king  hated 
and  loathed  by  his  people  for  every  sort  of  vice  and 
wickedness.  Innocent  replied  to  John  by  putting 
his  kingdom  under  an  interdict  (March  24,  1208). 
All  public  worship  ceased,  even  Christian  burial. 
Baptism  and  the  absolution  of  the  dying  alone  were 
continued.  John  was  unconcerned.  In  1209  he  was 
solemnly  excommunicated  by  the  Pope,  but  no  one 
ventured  to  publish  the  Bull  in  England.  Two 
years  later  he  was  threatened  with  deposition ;  and 
still  he  resisted.  But  in  1213,  finding  himself  utterly 
unsupported,  he  made  his  submission  to  the  Pope, 
not  only  receiving  Stephen  Langton  as  Archbishop, 
and  making  restitution  to  the  clergy,  but  surrender- 
ing his  kingdoms  to  Innocent  and  his  successors  as 
feudal  superiors,  and  receiving  them  back  as  a  vassal. 
He  had  done  what  had  never  been  done  by  English 
King  before,  hoping  that  the  papal  support  would 
avail  him  against  his  barons.  But  he  found  that  his 
barons,  with  the  very  man  at  their  head  whom  the 
Pope  had  forced  upon  him,  were  a  match  for  King 
and  Pope  united. 

At  a  council  held  at  St.  Paul's  London,  (Aug.  26, 
1213),  attended  by  bishops,  abbots,  priors,  deans,  and 
nobles,  the  Archbishop  reminded  them  that  the  King 
had  promised  to  rule  by  the  "  laws  of  King  Edward,'* 
a  common   formula  after  the  conpuest,  and  these 


The  Great  Charter.  27 

laws,  he  said,  were  embodied  in  the  Charter  of  Henry 
I.  These  were  more  favorable  to  the  Churcli  than 
those  of  the  constitutions  of  Clarendon  in  regard  to 
the  temporalities  during  vacancies  not  being  paid  to 
the  King.  The  barons  swore  to  contend  for  these 
liberties  to  the  death.  Both  the  King  and  the  legate 
piiid  little  attention  to  the  resolutions  of  the  council ; 
and  two  years  afterwards  (June  15,  1215),  the  Great 
Charter  was  signed  at  Uunnymede,  and  became  the 
guarantee  of  English  freedom  in  Church  and  State. 
It  has  sometimes  been  said  that  England  is  indebted 
to  the  papacy  for  this  boon.  To  Pope  Innocent  in- 
deed she  owes  Stephen  Langton  as  archbishop,  but 
not  the  great  charter.  On  the  contrary  he  rewarded 
John  for  his  submission  by  annulling  the  charter,  he 
excommunicated  the  barons,  and  suspended  Arch- 
bishop Stephen  for  refusing  to  publish  the  excom- 
munication. Before  he  could  give  effect  to  his 
friendship  for  John,  Innocent  died  (1216),  and  his 
successor  Honorius  III.,  reversed  his  action.  King 
John  died  in  the  same  year.  As  regards  the  Church 
the  Great  Charter  did  little  more  than  declare  that 
the  liberties  of  the  English  Church  should  be  main- 
tained whole  and  inviolate,  apparently  with  refer- 
ence to  the  freedom  of  elections. 

It  is  chiefly  to  Simon  de  Montfort,  Earl  of  Leices- 
ter, that  the  English  people  owe  it  that  the  contents 
of  the  Great  Charter  did  not  become  a  dead  letter; 
for  it  is  to  Earl  Simon  that  we  owe  the  beginnings 
of  parliamentary  government  in  the  reign  of  Henry 
III.  (1265). 

But  this  was  near  the  end  of  ^hat  long  reign  dur- 


28  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ing  which  foreign  influence  and  encroachment 
reached  a  height  to  which  they  had  never  before  at- 
tained in  Enghmd.  At  first,  when  the  Pope,  taking 
stand  upon  his  feudal  lordsliip,  demanded  certain 
subsidies  in  the  shape  of  English  benefices  to  be  put 
at  liis  disposal,  the  request  was  evaded,  jind  finally 
rejected.  But  the  Pope  found  ways  of  getting  the 
revenues  of  tlie  Church  into  his  hands,  by  requiring 
large  payments  before  giving  a  decision  on  questions 
referred  to  him  for  settlement.  In  ordinary  affairs, 
it  would  be  called  taking  bribes.  Thus,  at  the  elec- 
tion of  a  successor  to  Stephen  Langton,  when  the 
monks  and  the  King  disagreed,  the  King  promised 
the  Pope  a  tenth  of  the  whole  revenue  of  England, 
if  he  would  confirm  his  candidate,  Richard  le  Grand. 
Richard  was  confirmed  and  consecrated  at  Canter- 
bury. The  barons  and  bishops  resisted  the  payment 
of  the  tax ;  but  they  had  to  give  in.  The  tax  was 
levied  by  a  papal  agent  and  great  sacrifices  had  to  be 
endured  in  order  to  meet  the  demand.  And  these 
exactions  in  different  forms  went  on  to  a  degree  al- 
most incredible.  In  1256  Alexander  IV.  laid  claim 
to  the  first-fruits  of  all  bishoprics  and  other  benefices, 
an  exaction  which  was  continued  until  the  rupture 
between  Henry  VIII.  and  the  papacy. 

Another  papal  encroachment,  which  probably  did 
even  more  to  injure  the  Church  than  the  alienation 
of  its  revenues,  was  the  claim  to  appoint  to  benefices 
in  public  patronage.  By  such  means,  foreigners,  es- 
pecially Italians,  were  appointed  to  English  benefices, 
the  emoluments  of  which  they  enjoyed  without  even 
residing  in   England.     This  abuse   was  known  as 


Papal  Provisions.  29 


papal  provisions.  The  consequences  of  these  mis- 
doings were  terrible.  Matthew  Paris  declares: 
*'  Simony  was  perpetrated  witliout  a  blush,  usurers 
plied  tlieir  trade  everywhere.  Charity  was  dead, 
ecclesiastical  liberty  had  wasted  away,  religion  was 
trodden  under  foot ; "  and  Robert  Grosseteste,  Bishop 
of  Lincoln,  did  not  hesitate  to  declare  that  "  the 
cause,  the  fountain,  the  origin  of  all  this  is  the  Court 
of  Rome." 

The  English  people  had  been  growing  restive 
under  these  abuses  when  an  incident  occurred  which 
produced  a  crisis.  Pope  Innocent  IV.  nominated  a 
nephew  of  his  own,  a  mere  boy,  not  in  holy  orders, 
to  a  prebendal  stall  in  Lincoln,  desiring  the  Bishop 
to  induct  him  into  any  place  that  might  fall  vacant. 
Up  to  this  time  Grosseteste  had  generally  been  on 
the  side  of  the  Pope,  but  a  demand  like  this  was  in- 
tolerable. In  a  letter  to  Innocent,  which  sounds  al- 
most like  an  anticipation  or  first  note  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, the  Bishop  points  out  all  the  evil  consequences 
which  are  flowing  from  such  abuses.  "  On  this 
ground,"  he  goes  on,  "  out  of  the  debt  of  obedience 
and  fidelity  in  which  I  am  bound  to  the  holy  apos- 
tolic see,  and  from  my  love  of  union  with  it  in  the 
body  of  Christ,  I  refuse  to  obey  the  things  which 
are  contained  in  the  said  letter,  because  they  most 
evidently  tend  to  the  sin  which  I  have  mentioned 
[of  robbing  human  souls  of  divine  ordinances  in 
order  to  spend  upon  themselves],  most  abominable 
to  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  most  pernicious  to  the 
human  race,  and  are  altogether  opposed  to  the  holi- 
ness of  the  apostolic  see,  and  are  contrary  to  Cath- 


80  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

olic  unity.  I  oppose  these  things  and  rebel  against 
them."  It  is  uncertain  whether  the  Pope  excommu- 
nicated Grosseteste  in  consequence  of  this  boldness. 
If  he  did,  the  Bishop  paid  no  attention  to  it ;  but 
repeated  his  charges  to  the  last  moment  of  his  life, 
giving  utterance  to  a  sentiment  which  was  daily  ac- 
quiring increasing  strength  in  the  hearts  of  the 
English  people  (1253).  The  reign  of  Henry  III. 
furnishes  examples  of  many  abuses  in  Church  and 
State ;  but  many  of  these  do  not  bear  upon  the  rela- 
tions of  England  and  Rome. 

The  accession  of  Edward  I.,  was  marked  by  the 
appointment  of  a  Dominican  Friar,  Robert  de  Kil- 
wardy  to  the  see  of  Canterbury  (liI72),  an  appoint- 
ment which  could  not  be  acceptable  either  to  the 
secular  clergy  or  to  the  monks.  The  fortunes  of  the 
monastic  orders  had  been  strangely  varied.  They 
had  done  great  work  for  the  Church  in  the  preserva- 
tion of  ancient  documents,  in  the  cultivation  of 
learning,  in  the  d'^'.Jiion  of  education.  But  they 
had  undergone  a  regular  process  of  deterioration, 
nominally  retaining  the  vow  of  poverty,  in  the  sense 
that  no  individual  monk  was  owner  of  private  prop- 
erty, whilst  the  monasteries  became  wealthy,  luxu- 
rious, and  in  some  cases  immoral.  The  founders  of 
the  two  great  Mendicant  orders,  St.  Dominic  (1170- 
1221)  and  St.  Francis  (1182-1226),  forbade  to  their 
friars  the  possession  of  any  property  whatever,  mak- 
ing them  dependent  for  their  daily  sustenance  upon 
the  alms  which  they  might  receive.  Ultimately 
both  orders  disregarded  these  restrictions ;  but  at 
first  they  were  carefully  observed,  and  this  gave  them 


Statute  of  Mortmain.  81 

a  great  popularity  with  the  laity  who  were  angered 
by  the  inconsistencies  of  the  monastic  orders.  But 
there  was  this  one  great  drawback  to  their  use- 
fulness, that  they  were  immediately  dependent  upon 
the  Pope,  and  therefore  used  all  their  influence  for 
the  aggrandizement  of  his  authority  and  the  diminu- 
tion of  a  national  spirit  in  the  churches. 

Edward  I.,  the  most  able  member  of  the  great 
Plantagenet  family,  saw  the  danger  of  the  Church 
absorbing  a  large  share  of  the  property  of  the  coun- 
try. It  was  Archbishop  Peccham  who,  by  his  high- 
handed conduct,  stirred  up  King  Edward  to  meet 
them  by  having  the  statute  of  mortmain  passed  by 
the  Parliament  of  1279,  the  first  of  a  series  of  meas- 
ures taken  to  prevent  the  enrichment  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal corporations.  It  provided  that  "no  religious 
person  or  any  other  whatsoever  should  presume  to 
buy  or  sell  any  lands  or  tenements,  or  under  pre- 
tence of  donation,  or  grant,  or  any  other  title  what- 
soever, to  receive  such  from  any  one  ;  or  by  any 
method,  act,  or  skill,  to  appropriate  them  in  such  a 
way  as  whereby  such  lands  and  tenements  should 
devolve  in  any  manner  to  the  dead  hand."  If  this 
were  done,  the  lord  in  chief  was  to  have  the  power 
of  entering  and  seizing  the  fee.  The  object  of  the 
statute  was  manifest.  It  was  not  merely  that  the 
religious  bodies  could  not  be  called  upon  for  feudal 
service,  and  would  probably  evade  the  payment  of 
pecuniary  aids,  but  there  would  be  no  further  trans- 
fer of  the  estates  thus  appropriated,  and  so  the  King 
would  be  deprived  of  the  fines  and  other  payments 


82  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


made  in  such  cases.     The  Archbishop  made  a  great 
show  of  resistance,  but  speedily  yielded. 

Subsequently  (1296)  Edward  had  a  contest  with 
Archbishop  Winchelsea  and  the  clergy,  of  whom  he 
had  demanded  an  aid  for  the  expense  of  a  military 
expedition.  The  Archbishop  pleaded  that  a  papal 
Bull  ("  Clericis  laicos  ")  forbade  the  levying  of  such 
a  tax,  whereupon  the  King  outlawed  the  whole  cler- 
ical body  (1279).  The  dispute  ended  in  a  compro- 
mise, the  clergy  agreeing  to  tax  themselves,  whilst 
the  King  gave  up  the  right  of  taxing  them  without 
their  consent,  in  this  respect  putting  them  in  the 
same  position  as  the  laity.  The  clergy,  however, 
agreed  to  give  such  supplies  without  the  consent  of 
the  Pope. 

The  attempt  of  the  Pope  to  claim  a  suzerainty 
over  Scotland,  and  so  obstruct  King  Edward's  at- 
tempt on  that  country,  was  resented  by  the  nobility 
even  more  strongly  than  by  the  King.  Indeed  the 
King,  for  special  reasons,  was  not  unwilling  to  con- 
ciliate the  Pope ;  but  the  barons  not  only  maintained 
the  royal  rights  but  brought  about  the  passing  of  the 
act  known  as  tlie  Statute  of  Carlisle,  which  has  been 
called  the  first  direct  anti-Roman  Act  ever  passed  by 
an  English  parliament.  After  reciting  the  various 
grievances  endured  from  the  Roman  see,  the  inter- 
ference with  patronage,  the  alienation  of  Cathedral 
offices  to  foreigners,  the  exaction  of  Peter's  Pence 
and  other  payments,  with  special  reference  to  the  ex- 
tortion practised  by  a  papal  agent,  called  William  de 
Testa,  the  Statute  enacted  that  this  agent  should  not 
be  allowed  to  carry  out  of  the  country  the  money 


Statute  of  Provisors.  33 

which  he  had  collected  illegally;  and  that  all  who 
assisted  him  should  be  brought  before  the  King's 
courts  for  trial. 

The  accession  of  Edward  II.  (1807)  had  the  usual 
effect  resulting  from  the  place  of  a  strong  king  being 
filled  by  a  weak  one.  Everything  fell  into  confusion ; 
and  only  the  weakness  of  the  papal  authority  through 
the  "  Babylonish  captivity  "  prevented  the  Pope  from 
becoming  absolute  in  the  Church.  Still  the  encroach- 
ments went  on,  and  Edward  III.  (1327-1377)  made 
sundry  complaints  to  the  papal  see.  So  little  notice 
was  taken  of  these  that,  in  1343,  Clement  VI.  made 
a  "provision"  on  the  English  Church,  of  two  thou- 
sand marks  a  year,  for  the  support  of  two  cardinals. 
The  barons  addressed  a  petition  to  the  King,  praying 
that  he  would  put  an  end  to  these  abuses ;  and  the  King 
promised  to  take  action ;  and  the  barons  themselves 
addressed  a  protest  to  the  Pope.  The  papal  officers 
were  forbidden  to  prosecute  the  collection,  and  the 
people  to  assist  them.  A  proclamation  was  made 
that  no  one  should  under  penalty  venture  to  intro- 
duce into  the  realm  of  England  any  bulls  or  instru- 
ments prejudicial  to  the  crown.  To  the  complaints 
made  by  the  Pope,  the  'ling  (1343)  addressed  a  let- 
ter, complaining  of  the  injuries  inflicted  upon  the 
English  Church  by  provisions  and  reservations ;  and 
some  years  later  (1351)  effect  was  given  to  the  na- 
tional sentiment  by  the  passing  of  what  was  known 
as  the  first  Statute  of  Provisors. 

By  this  law  the  sending  incomes  of  Monasteries 

out  of  the  Kingdom  was  forbidden,  the  rights  of 

patrons  were  asserted,  and  it  was  enacted  that  in 
C 


■.yy"-;-^r.\. 


34  The  Anylican  Reformation. 

case  of  the  Pope  collating  to  any  office,  the  appoiiit- 
meiit  was  to  be  null,  and  the  King  was  to  have  the 
gift  .'jr  one  turn.  Moreover,  if  any  should  procure 
provisions  from  the  Pope,  they  were  to  be  imprisoned 
until  they  had  paid  the  fine  in  satisfaction  of  the 
King  and  the  patron  whose  rights  had  been  invaded. 
If  legislation  could  have  put  a  stop  to  the  evil  doings 
of  the  Court  of  Rome,  they  would  have  been  stopped. 
But,  unfortunately,  when  the  necessities  of  the  King 
made  him  at  any  time  dependent  on  the  assistance 
of  the  Roman  Pontiff,  the  price  he  had  to  pay  for 
such  help  was  the  setting  aside  or  the  suspension  of 
anti-Roman  laws;  and  this  very  statute  was  fre- 
quently ignored  and,  in  one  case,  actually  suspended 
by  the  King's  personal  authority. 

For  the  time,  however,  the  work  of  checking  Ro- 
man encroachments  went  on.  The  Statute  of  Pro- 
visors  was  followed  by  the  Statute  of  Prsemu7iire 
(1353),  a  name  taken  from  the  first  word  in  the  writ 
addressed  to  the  Sheriff  contained  in  the  Act;  and 
other  Acts  passed  for  the  same  purpose  are  known 
by  the  same  name.  The  aim  of  this  law  was  to  pre- 
vent vexatious  appeals  from  being  carried  to  Rome, 
which,  on  the  one  hand,  ignored  the  King's  court, 
and,  on  the  other,  set  aside  its  decisions.  The  stat- 
ute therefore  enacted  that  if  any  English  subject 
should  lodge  any  such  plea  in  courts  not  within  the 
realm,  he  should  have  two  months'  notice  to  answer 
for  contempt  in  the  King's  court,  and  if  he  did  not 
appear,  he  should  be  outlawed,  his  property  confis- 
cated, and  his  person  imprisoned  during  the  King's 
pleasure.     These  statutes  were  testimonies  to  the 


Statute  of  Prsemunire. 


85 


mind  of  the  people  of  England,  and  they  were 
altogether  without  effect,  although  it  was  ne-irlv 
centuries  before  they  were  regulrly   2;  j  ^  Zl 
acted  upon  as  English  law.  ^  ^ 


ere  not 
two 


^r<^  LIBRARY.     ^^^^N 
JAN  16   1800 


'"■iwr,3^f;'::;;;^^„"i»TC»*'" 


'^'^ 


CHAPTER  ly. 

WYCLIF  AND  THE  LOLLAKDS. 

|0  far  the  opposition  to  Rome  had  heen 
directed  against  encroachments  on  the 
liberties  of  the  Church  and  the  spoliation 
of  the  country  in  tlie  interests  of  the 
papacy  and  papal  nominees.  Tliese  grounds  of 
quarrel  were  never  for  long  out  of  the  minds  of  the 
people  of  England ;  but  the  time  came  when  an  at- 
tack was  to  be  made  upon  the  theology  of  the  medi- 
OBval  Church;  and  the  leader  in  this  attack  was  a 
man  of  remarkable  intellectual  strength  and  acute- 
ness,  of  wide  and  varied  learning,  of  a  deep  religious 
spirit,  and  of  indomitable  courage.  This  man  was 
John  Wyclif,  born  about  1320 — a  few  years  earlier 
than  Chaucer — at  Spresswell  in  Yorkshire.  The 
incidents  of  his  early  life  are  most  uncertain ;  but 
he  became  Master  of  Balliol  College  in  1361,  the 
year  of  one  of  the  great  plagues  known  as  the  Black 
Death.  In  1365,  as  appears  probable,  he  became 
Warden  of  Canterbury  Hall,  although  some  think  it 
was  another  man  of  the  same  name ;  but  he  was  ex- 
pelled from  this  post  by  the  monastic  members  of 
the  Hall,  and  this  action  was  confirmed  by  a  papal 
Ball  in  1370,  and  by  royal  decree  in  1872.  "  In  1374 
he  was  presented  by  the  King  to  the  Rectory  of 
Lutterworth,  in  Leicestershire,  which  he  held  until 
the  time  of  his  death.    Probably  this  was  the  result 

36 


'•.■«■' 


Work  of  Wyclif.  87 


of  his  friendship  with  John  of  Gaunt,  Duke  of  Lan- 
caster, third  son  of  Edward  III. 

It  was  about  the  year  1363,  when  he  took  his  de- 
gree as  Doctor  of  Divinity,  tliat  Wyclif  became  con- 
spicuous in  the  national  life  of  England.  First  of 
all,  as  Lechler  observes,  it  is  "  Wyclif  the  patriot 
whom  we  have  to  place  before  the  eye.  He  repre- 
sents in  his  own  person  that  intensification  of  Eng- 
lish national  feeling  which  was  so  conspicuous  in  the 
fourteenth  century,  when  Crown  and  people,  Nor- 
man population  and  Saxon,  formed  a  compact  unity, 
and  energetically  defended  the  autonomy,  the  rights 
and  the  interests  of  the  Kingdom  in  its  external 
relations,  and  especially  in  opposition  to  the  Court 
of  Rome.  This  spirit  lives  in  Wyclif  with  extraor- 
dinary force.  His  great  works  still ^  unprinted,  e.  g., 
the  three  books  De  Civili  Dominto^  his  work  De 
Ecclesia^  and  others,  leave  upon  the  reader  the 
strongest  impression  of  a  warm  patriotism,  of  a 
heart  glowing  with  zeal  for  the  dignity  of  the  Crown, 
for  the  honor  and  weal  of  his  native  land,  for  the 
rights  and  the  constitutional  liberty  of  the  people.'* 
At  his  first  appearance  he  was  the  statesman  and  the 
diplomatist,  rather  than  the  theologian,  although 
there  was  always  underneath  the  religious  spirit,  and 
*'  in  the  end  his  whole  undivided  strength  was  con- 
centrated upon  the  ecclesiastical  domain." 

It  is  an  error  to  say  that  Wyclif  began  his  work 
as  a  reformer  by  an  attack  on  the  mendicant  orders. 
It  was  not  until  after  1381,  when  he  assailed  the 

'  The  work  De  Ecclesia,  nnd  Book  I.  of  De  Civili  Dominio  have 
now  been  printed  by  the  Wyclif  Society  iu  London,  England. 


T  ■<u'' 


38  The  Amjlican  Reformation. 

doctrine  of  Tmnsubstiuitiiitioii  that  he  began  to  op- 
pose the  incndiciints  who  had  come  forward  as  the 
defenders  of  the  doctrine. 

In  13G5  Urban  V.  demanded  of  Edward  III.  pay- 
ment of  the  feudatory  tribute,  wliich  had  been  in  ar- 
rears for  thirty-three  years.  This  tribute  had  fust 
been  paid  by  King  John  to  Innocent  III.  (1213),  but  it 
had  never  been  paid  reguhirly,  and  Edward  III.,  from 
the  time  of  his  majority,  had  never  paid  it  at  all. 
The  King  brought  Urban's  demand  before  his  parlia- 
ment, (1366) ;  and  it  was  decided  by  the  Lords  spirit- 
ual and  temporal,  as  well  as  by  the  Commons,  that 
King  John  had  no  right  to  subject  the  country  to  this 
impost,  and  that  they  would  resist  to  the  uttermost 
any  attempt  on  the  part  of  the  Pope  to  enforce  his  claim. 
It  was  the  last  time  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  put 
himself  forward  as  the  feudal  superior  of  the  King 
of  England.  Wyclif  took  part  in  this  controversy 
and  wrote  a  pamphlet  {Determinatio  quocdam  de  Dom- 
inio)  on  the  English  side  ;  and  it  seems  by  no  means 
unlikely  that  Wyclif  was  a  member  of  this  parlia- 
ment. 

Wyclifs  pamphlet  is  of  importance  in  more  ways 
than  one.  In  the  first  place  it  contains  the  first  indica- 
tion of  liis  doctrine  of  Dominion,  based  upon  the  theory 
of  feudal  tenure ;  and  further,  it  shows  that  his  first 
contention  with  Rome  was  not  on  doctrinal,  but  on 
political  grounds, — setting  forth  doctrines  which  are 
further  expounded  in  the  work,  De  Dominio.  Begin- 
ning with  denying  the  right  of  the  spiritualty  to  inter- 
fere in  secular  affairs,  he  proceeded  to  deny  the  lawful- 
ness of  the  Church  holding  any  temporal  possessions 


^>-'  r^'.   -•,•.»' 


Wyclifs  llieory  of  Dominion.  89 

at  all.  For  this  reason  he  was  at  first  favorable  to  the 
inendicaiit  orders.  Starting  from  the  fundamental 
position  that  God  was  Lord,  of  all,  he  proceeded  to 
show  that  disloyalty  to  the  Most  High  involved  the 
forfeiture  of  all  rights.  He  further  taught  that  prop- 
erty belonged  to  the  community,  that  the  spiritual 
power  should  not  meddle  with  secular  affairs,  and,  if 
doing  so,  should  be  subject  to  civil  law;  that  the 
Church  should  hold  no  property ;  that  excommuni- 
cation is  not  valid  unless  justified  by  the  sin  of  the 
excommunicated  person.  Many  of  these  propositions 
are  now  generally  held,  if  not  precisely  in  the  same 
form  ;  but  the  theory  of  dominion,  which  made  the 
authority  of  an  official  depend  upon  his  being  in  a 
state  of  grace,  was  obviously  dangerous  and  led  to 
serious  consequences. 

A  parliament  met  in  1371,  at  which  Edward  HI. 
demanded  a  large  subsidy  for  carrying  on  the  war. 
The  clergy  resisted  the  resolution  passed  to  include 
them  in  the  obligation  to  raise  the  money.  The 
arguments  of  Wyclif  which  were  strongly  against 
the  enrichment  of  the  clergy,  seem  to  have  been 
used  at  this  parliament,  and  to  have  made  him  very 
unpopular  with  the  clergy,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to 
have  recommended  him  to  John  of  Gaunt  and  the 
Court  party.  He  was  chosen  as  one  of  the  English 
commissioners  to  settle  the  dispute  between  the 
Papacy  and  the  English  Crown  at  Bruges  (1374).  It 
was  at  this  time  that  the  King  suspended  the  Stat- 
ute of  Provisors  by  his  mere  prerogative ;  but  the 
"  Good  Parliament "  of  1376  took  very  strong 
measures  against  the  Roman  claims,  setting  forth  the 


40  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

many  grievances  under  which  the  Kingdom  was  suf- 
fering, and  asking  that  remedies  might  be  found. 
There  can  be  little  doubt  that  Wyclifs  influence 
was  great  throughout  the  whole  of  this  controversy. 

But  it  was  not  merely  in  the  Parliament  that  his 
influence  was  felt.  When  John  of  Gaunt  wanted  to 
get  supplies  voted  by  convocation,  he  called  in  the 
aid  of  Wyclif.  But  the  clergy  were  not  easily 
coerced ;  and  among  other  replies  to  the  Duke's 
challenge  they  summoned  Wyclif  to  appear  before 
them  to  answer  for  the  heresies  of  which  he  was  ac- 
cused. A  quarrel  between  the  Duke  of  Gaunt  and 
Courtenay,  Bishop  of  London,  prevented  the  case 
from  coming  to  a  hearing. 

But  another  way  was  to  be  found  of  dealing  with 
the  errors  of  Wyclif.  His  enemies  had  collected  out 
of  his  writings  nineteen  propositions  or  conclusions 
which  they  sent  to  the  Pope,  desiring  his  judgment 
upon  them.  Most  of  these  propositions  were  taken 
from  the  first  book  of  his  treatise  De  Oivili  Dominio^ 
which  we  have  now  before  us,  so  that  we  are  able  to 
say  that  his  statements  were  not  misrepresented. 

It  will  be  sufficient  here  to  note  the  chief  features 
of  the  nineteen  theses.^  His  fundamental  proposi- 
tion is,  that  the  rights  of  property  and  inheritance 
are  not  absolute  and  unconditioned,  but  dependent 
upon  God's  grace  and  will.  In  articles  six  and  seven 
he  lays  it  down  that,  "as  God  may  take  away  the 
goods  of  fortune  from  a  delinquent  Church,  so  also 
may  Kings  and  temporal  rulers  withdraw  from  those 
who  abuse  the  property  of  the  Church  or  fall  into 
'  They  may  be  found  in  Canon.     Perry's  History. 


-a'-'-i—    f*  ,•'  ^  ^   ^'- 


Theses  of  WycUf.  41 

error,  their  temporiil  property,  in  a  legal  and  moral 
manner.  At  the  same  time  Wyclif  does  not  pretend 
to  say  whether  the  Church  is  in  error,  nor  is  it  his 
business  to  inquire :  that  is  the  business  of  temporal 
lords.  From  eight  to  fifteen  theses  guard  against 
the  abuse  of  the  power  of  the  keys.  Such  power  must 
be  used  in  conformity  with  the  Gospel,  or  it  is  in- 
valid. Cursing  or  excommunication,  he  says  (Art. 
xi.),  does  not  bind  simply,  but  only  so  far  as  it  is  de- 
nounced against  an  adversary  of  the  law  of  Christ ; 
and  again  (Art.  xv.) :  Then  only  does  the  Pope  bind 
or  loose,  when  ho  conforms  himself  to  the  law  of 
Christ. 

As  a  consequence  of  these  representations  Pope 
Gregory  XT.  issued  a  series  of  Bulls  to  the  Uni- 
versity of  Oxford,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
the  Bishop  of  London,  and  the  King;  but  Edward 
III.  was  dead  (June  21,  1377),  before  the  Bull  ar- 
rived. These  documents  produced  no  great  imme- 
diate effect.  The  bishops  were  very  lukewarm  in  the 
matter,  perhaps  afraid  of  ulterior  consequences.  The 
University  of  Oxford  was  worse,  seeming,  on  the 
whole,  to  be  on  the  side  of  Wyclif.  The  bishops 
waited  for  the  report  of  the  University,  and  the 
University  made  no  report.  The  government  was 
on  the  side  of  the  accused,  and  especially  the  mother 
of  the  young  King. 

In  the  autumn  of  this  year  (1377),  Wyclif  was 
consulted  by  the  English  parliament  as  to  the  lawful- 
ness of  prohibiting  treasure  from  passing  out  of  the 
country  in  obedience  to  the  Pope's  command,  and 
naturally  gave  his  judgment  in  opposition  to  the 


42  The  Ancjlican    Reformation. 

papal  claim.  Before  this  parliament  he  laid  his  reply 
to  the  Pope's  Bulls.  His  defence  was  sustained  by 
his  University ;  but  he  had  further  to  clear  himself 
before  the  bishops;  and  in  February  1378  he  ap- 
peared in  the  Chapel  of  Lambeth  Palace,  where  his 
defence,  couched  in  guarded  languag  ,  was  laid  be- 
fore the  Council.  But  a  stop  was  put  to  the  pro- 
ceedings by  a  dispatch  from  the  Princess  of  Wales 
(Queen-mother),  bidding  them  not  presume  to  de- 
cide anything  against  Wyclif.  Moreover  the  citizens 
of  London  and  a  great  mob  forced  their  way  into 
the  Chapel,  and  such  confusion  arose  that  the  court 
had  to  be  closed.  When  Wyclif,  just  a  year  before, 
had  appeared  before  Bishop  Courtenay  in  St.  Paul's, 
the  London  mob  had  sided  with  their  bishop :  they 
have  now  gone  over  to  the  reformer. 

In  the  same  year  Pope  Gregory  XI.  died,  and  the 
papal  schism  began.  This  gave  an  impulse  to 
Wyclif's  anti-papal  action,  and  led  to  his  sending 
forth  his  "poor  priests"  to  preach  the  Gospel 
throughout  the  country,  and  to  his  undertaking  the 
translation  of  the  whole  Bible,  which  he  accom- 
plished with  the  help  of  Nicholas  Hereford,  who 
translated  part  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  influence 
of  these  preachers  was  immense ;  and  perhaps  this  is 
a  proper  place  in  which  to  express  a  doubt  as  to  the 
truth  of  an  opinion  somewhat  widely  propagated — 
that  the  influence  of  Wyclif  and  the  Lollards  was 
of  short  duration  in  England.  It  is  impossible  to 
acquiesce  in  this  opinion.  It  is  not  merely  that  tlie 
opinions  and  writings  of  Wyclif  were  circulated  in 
Bohemia,  and  were  accepted  by  Huss  and  Jerome : 


Wyclif  and  Transubstantiatton.  48 

that  these  men,  in  their  turn,  exercised  a  very  pow- 
erful influence  on  the  Gernnin  Ueforination,  and  this 
again  on  the  Ueforination  in  Enghmd ;  but  it  is  al- 
most demonstrable  that  the  teaching  of  Wyclif  lived 
on  in  a  kind  of  undercurrent  among  the  people  of 
England,  and  may  probably  be  still  the  very  heart  of 
that  Puritanism  which  has,  for  centuries,  been  so 
large  an  ingredient  in  English  religious  life.  This 
subject,  however,  will  meet  us  again. 

Wyclif  was,  more  and  more,  departing  from  the 
traditional  system  of  the  Middle  Ages.  He  was 
practically  in  rebellion  against  the  Pope  :  he  was  cir- 
culating the  Scriptures  in  English,  and  disseminating 
a  spiritual  teaching  calculated  to  undermine  many 
of  the  theories  and  practices  of  the  age :  he  was  now 
as  hostile  to  the  friars  as  he  had  been  to  the  monks. 
Not  only  was  their  professed  p.overty  very  commonly 
a  delusion,  but  they  were  the  most  energetic  up- 
holders of  the  papal  power.  And  now  (1381)  he  be- 
gins an  attack  on  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation. 
It  was  not  the  first  time  that  the  dogma  had  been 
assailed.  Paschasius  Radbertus,  in  setting  forth  the 
doctrine,  had  been  assailed  by  Ratramnus,  and 
Lanfranc  by  Rerengarius;  and  Wyclif  took  up  a  po- 
sition not  greatly  different  from  these  earlier  ad- 
versaries. It  is  not,  indeed,  quite  easy  to  say  wliat  is 
the  special  relation  of  Wyclif's  teaching  to  the  cur- 
rent belief  of  his  day.  It  might  perhaps  be  com- 
pared to  the  so  called  doctrine  of  Consubstantiation ; 
but  we  might  not  then  be  much  nearer  to  an  under- 
standing of  the  matter.  At  least  it  can  be  said  that 
Wyclif  disputed  and  denied  the  ordinary  manner  of 


'        >■     ,'.   7     t   •;-*«*^V,^^  . 


44  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

stating  the  doctrine,  and  so  was  the  beginner  of 
that  which,  after  the  death  of  Henry  VIII.,  became 
a  leading  feature  in  the  English  Reformation,  a  de- 
nial of  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation. 

At  last  Courtenay,  now  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, determined  to  bring  Wyclif  to  trial.  He  as- 
sembled a  provincial  council  at  Blackfriars,  May  21, 
1382,  where,  however,  he  found  the  chancellor  and 
the  proctors  of  Wyclifs  University  on  the  side  of  the 
accused.  Indeed  so  strong  was  the  feeling  that  the 
Archbishop's  comuissary  said  his  life  was  not  safe  in 
Oxford.  Thi  '^';  taken  from  Wyclifs  writings  were 
condemned,  some  of  his  followers  were  imprisoned, 
but  Wyclif  himself  was  left  undisturbed.  The 
House  of  Lords  passed  an  ordinance  against  his 
preachers,  but  the  House  of  Commons  threw  it  out 
(1382).  Most  of  his  own  work  was  now  done  in  re- 
tirement at  Lutterworth,  where  he  wrote  the  Tria- 
logiis  and  other  works  of  importance.  On  the  28th 
of  December,  1384,  lie  received  a  second  stroke  of 
paralysis  and  died  on  New  Year's  Eve.  The  Council 
of  Constance  (1415)  decreed  that  his  remains  should 
be  dug  np  and  burned,  and  this  was  done  in  1428. 

The  followers  of  Wvclif  were  known  as  Lollards, 
a  name  the  derivation  of  which  is  uncertain.  The 
movement  became  so  considerable  that  it  was  said, 
every  second  man  in  England  was  a  Lollard.  The 
poor  preachers  of  Wyclif,  with  their  long  russet 
gown  and  uncouth  speech,  proclaiming  in  simple 
language  the  truths  of  the  Gospel  attained  to  great 
influence  with  the  common  people.  "  To  be  poor 
without  mendicancy,"  says  Professor  Shirley,  "to 


The  Poor  Preachers.  45 

unite  the  flexible  unity,  the  swift  obedience  of  an 
order,  with  free  and  constant  mingling  among  the 
poor,  such  was  the  ideal  of  Wyclif 's  poor  priests." 
They  not  only  obtained  popularity  among  the  poor, 
but  were  supported  and  maintained  by  many  among 
the  noble  and  the  rich.  By  degrees  they  became  so 
strong  that  they  even  ventured  to  petition  parliament 
to  reform  the  Church  in  accordance  with  their 
theories  (1895).  It  is  said  that  the  substance  of  this 
petition  is  contained  in  the  "  Lollard  Conclusions," 
in  which  it  is  declared  that  temporal  possessions  ruin 
the  Church,  that  the  Monk's  vow  has  an  effect  the 
reverse  of  that  contemplated,  that  Transubstantiation 
is  a  falsehood,  and  leads  to  idolatry,  that  prayers 
should  not  be  made  for  the  dead,  and  that  auricular 
confession  was  a  root  of  many  evils  and  abuses. 
They  also  denounced  wars,  vows  of  chastity,  trades 
which  pandered  to  luxurious  and  extravagant  modes 
of  life.  In  all  this  they  were  carrying  out  the  spirit 
of  Wyclif's  teaching. 

How  the  matter  struck  the  English  laborer  in 
those  days  we  may  infer  from  "  Piers  Ploughman's 
Creed,"  written  just  before  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
Richard  II.,  which  gives  us  a  "portrait  of  the  fat 
friar  with  his  double  chin  shaking  about  as  big  as  a 
goose's  egg^  and  the  ploughman  with  his  hood  full  of 
holes,  his  mittens  made  of  patches,  and  his  poor  wife 
going  barefoot  on  the  ice  so  that  her  blood  followed." 
Langland,  the  author  of  this  poem  and  the  contem- 
porary of  Cliaucer,  was  a  man  of  noble  and  exal'ed 
character,  deeply  sympathizing,  as  his  great  poem 
declares,  with  the  sorrows  and  sufferings  of  his  age. 


-';*7';'iT*y«:7- 


46  llie  AiKjlican  Reformation. 


It  was  surely  an  example  of  the  irony  of  history 
when  the  law  for  the  destruction  of  Lollardism  was 
passed  in  the  second  year  of  Henry  IV.  (1401),  son 
of  that  John  of  Gaunt,  who  was  the  friend  and  pro- 
tector of  Wyclif.  A  more  disgraceful  law  never 
stood  on  the  pages  of  the  statute-book  of  England 
than  this,  De  heretico  comburendo.  It  was  not  that  this 
was  the  first  law  which  made  the  burning  of  heretics 
possible  and  legal ;  for  at  the  very  time  when  it  was 
under  the  consideration  of  the  parliament,  the  King, 
under  the  influence  of  Archbishop  Arundel,  had  issued 
a  writ  for  the  burning  ot  a  Lollard  named  William 
Sawtre,  after  he  had  been  condemned  by  convoca- 
tion. But  it  inaugurated  a  new  course  of  things, 
and  it  bore  some  miserable  fruits  in  the  birth-throes 
of  the  Reformation.  By  this  statute  it  was  provided 
that,  if  a  heretic  who  had  been  convicted  in  an 
ecclesiastical  court  refused  to  recant,  he  should  be 
handed  over  to  the  sheriff  to  be  burned.  But  the  law 
was  made  still  more  severe  after  the  rebellion  of  Sir 
John  Oldcastle  :  it  was  provided  further  (1414)  that 
the  King's  justices  should  have  power  to  seek  out 
offenders  and  deliver  thera  over  to  the  ordinary  for 
trial,  thus  giving  the  initiative  to  the  government. 
It  should  be  remembered  that  the  passing  of  these 
measures  was  the  price  paid  by  the  King  to  the 
Archbishop  and  the  Clergy  for  their  support  of  his 
pretensions  to  the  throne  of  England.  Many  burn- 
ings were  the  consequences  of  these  atrocious  laws. 

It  must  not  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  papal 
party  had  now  secured  a  final  victory.  In  the  very 
year  of  the  accession  of  Henry  IV.  to  the  throne 


The  Pope  and  the  Parliament.  47 

(1899)  it  '  as  alleged  as  one  of  the  accusations 
against  tLj  late  King,  that  he  had  been  subservient 
to  the  lloraan  see,  in  seeking  a  confirmation  of  his 
acts  from  the  Pope ;  whereas,  they  solemnly  declared, 
"the  Crown  of  England,  and  the  rights  of  the  same 
crown,  have  been  from  all  times  so  free,  that  neither 
chief  pontiff,  nor  any  one  else  outside  the  Kingdom, 
has  any  right  to  interfere  in  the  same." 

When  Martin  V.  came  to  the  papal  throne  (1417), 
he  wrote  to  Archbishop  Cliichele  complaining  griev- 
ously of  the  anti-papal  statutes  passed  from  time  to 
time  by  the  English  parliament,  and  bidding  him  see 
that "  that  execrable  statute  [of  PraBmunire]  put  forth 
against  the  liberty  of  the  Church  in  England  " — a 
view  so  different  from  that  of  those  who  passed  it  as 
a  protection  of  that  liberty — "  which  is  opposed  to 
divine  and  human  law  and  reason  may  be  altogether 
abolished."  The  Archbishop  was  anxious  to  satisfy 
the  Pope ;  but  the  Commons  presented  a  petition  to 
the  King,  praying  him  to  uphold  the  liberties  of  the 
Church  and  to  resist  these  papal  encroachments. 
They  even  went  so  far  as  to  request  that  the  Eng- 
lish ambassadors  might  be  instructed  to  request  the 
Pope  not  to  continue  these  aggressions.  The  Pope 
most  unjustly  blamed  the  Archbishop,  and  intended 
to  deprive  him  of  his  legatine  authority.  But  the 
Bulls  which  he  despatched  for  the  appointment  of 
another  legate  were  seized  and  deposited  unopened 
in  the  royal  archives.  If  these  acts  of  parliament 
had  been  as  operative  as  they  were  definite,  the 
papal  authority  over  England  would  have  become 
little  more  than  a  name.     Unfortunately  the  em- 


;viyv 


43  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

barrassments  of  kings,  the  disorder  of  the  state,  the 
confiicts  of  parties  sometimes  threw  the  one  side  or 
the  other  into  the  hands  of  the  Pope,  sometimes 
made  a  v/atchful  care  over  ecclesiastical  .affairs  almost 
an  impossibility ;  and  the  Pope  was  ever  ready  to 
take  advantage  of  such  occasions.  But  the  laws  for 
the  defence  of  the  liberties  of  the  Church  still  stood 
upon  the  statute  book. 


CHAPTER  V. 

THE  CHURCH  BEFORE  THE  REFORMATION. 

T  is  not  easy  to  form  a  trustworthy  esti- 
mate of  tlie  character  of  past  times.  It 
is  by  no  means  safe,  for  example,  to  trust 
to  the  testimonies  of  contemporaries.  For 
not  only  arc  there  in  every  age  the  landers  of  the 
past  who  can  see  hardly  any  good  in  their  own  times, 
whilst  they  attribute  to  the  past  qualities  created  or 
colored  by  their  own  imagination ;  but  we  have  to  be 
careful  of  receiving  contemporary  testimony  which 
may  be  biased  either  way  by  personal  or  party 
prejudices.  Yet,  there  are  certain  sources  from 
which  we  may  derive  fairly  accurate  information, 
such  as  the  literature  of  an  age  and  the  actual  and 
verified  facts  of  history. 

In  regard  to  the  fifteenth  Century,  it  is  one  of  the 
most  barren  of  literature  in  English  history.  Yet 
this  very  absence  of  thought  and  expression  is  in- 
structive ;  and  it  is  not  without  monuments  of  its 
own  genius.  If  we  compare  the  products  of  the 
thirteenth  century  or  even  of  the  fourteenth,  in 
literature  or  in  art,  with  those  of  the  fifteenth,  we 
are  at  once  sensible  of  deterioration.  And  this  de- 
terioration is  reflected  in  the  lives  and  characters 
of  the  men  of  the  time  of  all  classes. 

To  begin  with  the  papacy,  the  deterioration  from  the 
time  of  great  popes  like  Gregory  VII.  and  Innocent 
D  49 


60  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

III.  to  the  time  of  the  "  Babylonish  captivity  "  is  un- 
deniable and  undoubted.^  Licentiousness  and  venal- 
ity had  reached  such  a  pitch  that  Petrarch,  who  re- 
sided near  Avignon,  speaks  of  the  papal  court  there  as 
a  sink  of  iniquity  and  a  hell  upon  earth.  Martin  V., 
though  insolent  and  domineering,  was  respectable. 
Nicholas  V.  was  more  than  this,  and  Pius  II.  (jiEneas 
Sylvius)  was  scarcely  inferior  to  him.  But  Paul 
II.  (1464-1471),  who  succeeded  him,  and  was  the 
nephew  of  the  excellent  pontiff  (Eugenius  IV.)  who 
reigned  between  Martin  V.  and  Nicholas  V.,  was 
arrogant,  ostentatious,  greedy,  unscrupulous,  and 
mendacious.  At  this  time,  it  was  said,  every  other 
precious  thing  was  as  cheap  at  Rome  as  the  Pope's 
oath.  His  successor,  Sixtus  IV.  (1471-1484)  was  still 
worse.  In  his  reign  simony  was  open  and  undis- 
guised ;  no  benefice  was  given  away  without  being  paid 
for.  His  nepotism  was  shameful  and  undisguised. 
Innocent  VIII.  was  no  better ;  as  a  ruler  perhaps 
worse.  Murders  were  quite  common  ;  and  if  the 
murderer  could  pay,  he  was  seldom  brought  to  jus- 
tice. When  an  attempt  was  made  to  stamp  out 
clerical  concubinage  by  excommunication  and  sus- 
pension of  offenders,  the  Pope  put  a  stop  to  the  pro- 
ceedings on  the  ground  that  it  was  practically  uni- 
versal. It  was  Innocent  who,  for  family  reasons, 
made  Giovanni  de  Medici  (afterwards  Leo  X.)  a 
cardinal,  when  he  was  only  thirteen. 

Innocent  was  succeeded  by  Alexander  VI.  (1493- 
1503),  the  father  of  Caesar  and  Lucretia  Borgia,  who 

' On  the  contents  of  this  chapter  compare  the  ^riter^s  "Savon- 
ATola :    His  Life  and  Times. ' ' 


.Y»7  »■ ''  aA«i'^  I'  ^.r; ' '; •. 


State  of  the  Church,  51 

was  simply  a  monster.  It  speaks  volumes  for  the 
character  of  tlie  age,  that  he  seems  to  have  been 
popular  in  Rome.  Julius  II.  who  succeeded  to  the 
papal  throne  in  the  year  of  Alexander's  deatli  (the 
short  reign  of  Pius  III.  coming  between)  declared 
that  Borgia  was  a  "  scoundrel  and  a  heretic." 
Julius  was  the  Pope  who  appeared  in  armor  at  the 
siege  of  Milan,  and  he  was  succeeded  (1513)  by  the 
"elegant  pagan  pope,"  Leo  X.  So  much  for  the 
popes  of  the  period  immediately  preceding  the  Ref- 
ormation. 

With  regard  to  the  secular  clergy,  they  could 
hardly  have  been  superior  to  their  rulers.  If  tlie 
popes  and  bishops  exacted  money  from  priests  and 
laymen,  these  must  have  paid  it.  It  is  believed  that 
in  England  matters  were  not  nearly  so  bad  as  in 
Italy ;  yet  it  is  clear  that  they  were  by  no  means  in 
a  satisfactory  condition.  Even  if  the  clergy  could 
maintain  that  those  whom  the  Church  called  concu- 
bines, were  in  reality  their  wives,  the  general  effect 
of  such  unsanctioned  unions  must  have  been,  and 
actually  was  injurious.  Benefices  were  openly 
bought  and  sold ;  whilst  the  clergy  extorted  money 
from  the  laity  by  means  of  the  confessional  and  the 
discipline  of  the  Church.  Their  ignorance  was  often 
incredible.  Wyclif  declared  of  many  of  the  clergy  of 
liis  day  that  they  knew  not  the  ten  commandments, 
nor  read  their  psalter,  nor  understood  a  verse  of  it. 

Perhaps  the  saddest  monument  of  the  moral  and 
religious  decay  of  the  period  is  found  in  the  state  of 
the  religious  houses.  To  this  we  have  already  re- 
ferred, and  it  is  not  denied.     The  debt  which  the 


52  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Church  owes  to  the  religious  orders  and  their  great- 
est representatives  is  incalculable.  To  the  Benedic- 
tines of  St.  Maur,  for  example,  we  are  indebted  for 
the  splendid  fruits  of  their  learning  in  the  Benedic- 
tine editions  of  the  fathers.  Yet  we  have  the  most 
signal  and  painful  proof  of  the  invasion  of  their 
monasteries  by  the  spirit  of  the  world  in  the  success- 
ive attempts  to  make  the  rule  more  severe.  Thus 
the  founding  of  the  reformed  Benedictine  Monastery 
at  Clugny  in  the  beginning  of  the  tenth  Century,  and 
of  the  order  of  Cluniacs  was  a  protest  against  the  de- 
generacy of  the  Benedictines.  And  then  again,  at  the 
end  of  the  eleventh  Century,  what  was  counted  the 
luxury  and  extravagance  of  the  Cluniacs  led  to  the 
reformed  rule  of  the  Carthusians  and  the  Cistercians. 

It  was  even  more  surprising  that  the  same  corrup- 
tion should  have  seized  upon  the  friars,  since,  in 
their  case,  not  only  the  individual,  but  the  com- 
munity, was  vowed  to  poverty.  We  have  seen  how 
Wyclif,  originally  favorable  to  the  friars,  was  ulti- 
mately opposed  to  them  on  the  ground  of  their  sub- 
serviency to  the  papacy  and  their  impudent  idleness 
and  self-indulgence.  Once  when  he  was  supposed 
to  be  dying,  he  rallied  himself  and  exclaimed:  "I 
shall  not  die,  but  live,  and  declare  the  works  of  the 
friars."  A  century  later  Savonarola  was  lending  all 
his  gigantic  strength  to  effect  a  reformation  in  the 
great  order  of  St.  Dominic — the  order  of  St.  Thomas 
Aquinas  and  the  Summa  ;  and  the  work  was  almost 
too  great  for  him. 

There  is  a  certain  danger  in  comprehending  a  whole 
system  in  a  general  condemnation  because  of  the  de- 


State  of  the  Monasteries.  53 

fects  or  corruptions  of  particular  bodies;  and  we 
shall  have  occasion  to  remark  that  some  of  the  re- 
ligious establishments  of  the  fifteenth  and  sixteenth 
centuries  realized  not  unworthily  the  idea  and  design 
of  their  founders ;  and  that,  even  if  the  numbers  of 
these  houses  were  excessive,  yet  in  the  Middle  Ages 
they  subserved  most  important  purposes  in  respect 
to  education  and  the  relief  of  the  poor ;  and  that  some 
of  them  were  treated  with  great  injustice.  It  may 
however,  be  accepted  as  an  evidence  that  the  monas- 
teries had  ceased  to  satisfy,  and  also  perhaps  as  a 
sign  of  the  times,  that  the  charitably  disposed  now 
began  to  found  schools  and  colleges  rather  than  mon- 
asteries.    . 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  carry  our  remarks  further. 
There  was  a  lower  depth  than  that  of  the  ordinary 
secular  priests  and  the  regulars,  that  of  the  inferior 
clergy  and  the  chantry  priests,  whose  business  was 
to  say  masses  for  the  departed.  These  men,  having 
much  time  at  their  disposal,  were  generally  idle  and 
dissipated,  and  apparently  formed  the  largest  number 
of  the  clergy. 

Among  what  must  be  regarded  as  the  abuses  of 
the  age  are  to  be  reckoned  the  pilgrimages  and  the 
paying  of  vows  at  sacred  shrines,  acts  of  devotion 
which  became  practically  compulsory.  These  prac- 
tices had  been  opposed  by  the  Lollards,  and  Arch- 
bishop Arundel  had  declared  that  "Holy  Church  hath 
determined  that  it  is  needful  for  a  Christian  man  to 
go  a  pilgrimage  to  holy  places,  and  there  especially 
to  worship  holy  relics  of  saints,  apostles,  martyrs, 
confessors,  and  all  saints  approved  by  the  Church  of 


54  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Rome."  They  were  also  defended  by  Bishop  Pecock, 
the  celebrated  apologist  for  the  clergy  of  the  period. 

The  value  of  the  pilgrimages  was  supposed  to  lie 
in  the  indulgences  granted  to  the  pilgrims.  It  is 
hardly  necessary  here  to  say  more  than  a  few  words 
on  the  indulgences  which  were  the  immediate  occa- 
sion of  Luther's  resistance  to  the  papal  authority  and 
of  the  Germjin  Reformation.  It  is  not  quite  easy  to 
determine  the  view  entertained  of  the  benefits  con- 
nected with  the  indulgences  by  those  who  were  the 
recipients  of  them,  or  the  prospects  held  out  by  those 
who  sold  them.  According  to  the  theologians,  an 
indulgence  was  simply  a  remission  of  part  of  the 
temporal  punishment  of  sin,  generally  undergone  in 
purgatory.  It  was  a  remission  of  part  of  the  pun- 
ishment to  be  endured  by  those  who  were  in  a  state 
of  grace.  It  could  not  avail  for  the  impenitent  and 
unbelieving.  But  it  is  almost  certain  that  it  meant 
a  great  deal  more  than  this  in  the  popular  mind.  If 
a  portion  of  the  stories  told  in  connection  with  the 
sale  of  indulgences  in  Germany  can  be  relied  upon, 
these  indulgences  were  regarded  as  conveying  at 
least  immunity  from  all  the  consequences  of  sin, 
apart  altogether  from  the  repentance  of  the  sinner, 
if  they  did  not  also  give  a  licence  to  sin  in  the  future. 
Here,  as  in  many  other  cases,  such  as  the  invocation 
of  saints  and  the  position  assigned  to  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  it  is  quite  clear  that  there  is  a  wide  differ- 
ence between  the  teachings  of  the  doctors  and  the 
practices  of  the  people- 

Without  regarding  the  Church  of  these  times  from 
the  point  of  view  of  Wyclif,  it  is  yet  manifest  that, 


Wealth  of  the  Church.  55 

in  various  waya,  by  indulgences  to  the  living  and 
masses  for  the  dead,  by  appeals  to  the  fears  and  the 
hopes  of  the  ignorant,  the  Church  had  become  the 
owner  of  an  immense  amount  of  property.  This  is 
made  quite  clear  by  a  consideration  of  the  amount 
paid  by  the  clergy  in  taxes,  which  was  nearly  one- 
third  of  the  whole  taxation  of  the  nation.  Yet,  in 
spite  of  the  influence  resulting  from  their  wealth  and 
position,  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  power  of  the 
clergy  was  seriously  weakened  and  less  able  to  resist 
the  currents  of  thought  set  in  motion  by  the  two 
great  movements  which  had  arisen  in  Western 
Europe,  the  revival  of  letters  and  the  tendency  to 
reformation  of  doctrine  and  discipline.^ 

'  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  remind  the  reader  that  the  words 
clergy  and  clerics  iuclade  uot  only  priests  and  deacons,  bat  all 
the  minor  orders. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

PBECUESOES  OF  THE  REFORMATION — COLET,  MORE, 

ERASMUS. 

ANY  causes  contributed  to  the  result  which 
we  designate  the  Reforniation,  among 
them,  the  rise  of  a  national  spirit,  a  cer- 
tain impatience  of  intellectual  control,  an 
indisposition  to  submit  to  manifest  abuses  in  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church,  and  not  least  the  revival  of 
learning,  known  as  the  Renaissance.  The  spirit  of 
the  Renaissance  was,  indeed,  widely  different  from 
that  which  gave  an  impulse  to  the  reformation  move- 
ment. Both  were  of  the  nature  of  revolts  against 
the  authorities  of  the  period ;  but  the  religious  re- 
volt was  a  return  to  Scripture,  the  literary  revolt  was 
a  return  to  reason  and  Greek  litorature  and  art.  It 
would  not  be  correct  to  say  that  the  Renaissance 
originated  with  the  fall  of  Constantinople  in  1483. 
Long  before  this,  Petrarch  (1304-1374),  although 
himself  not  a  Greek  scholar,  had  given  a  great  im- 
pulse to  the  diffusion  of  Greek  literature.  But  it 
was  undoubtedly  the  emigration  of  Greek  scholars 
from  Constantinople,  at  the  fall  of  the  Eastern  em- 
pire, and  their  settlement  in  Italy  which  was  the 
principal  cause  of  the  diffusion  of  that  remarkable 
spirit  which  took  possession  of  the  more  reflective 

66 


The  Kenaissance,  57 


minds  in  Florence  and  Italy  in  the  closing  years  of 
the  fifteenth  century.  It  can  liardly  be  said  that 
Plato  displaced  Christ,  for  Christ  was  by  no  means 
King  of  Florence  in  the  days  preceding  Politian  and 
Pico  della  Mirandola  and  Ficino,  Still,  unless  so  far 
as  it  came  under  the  influence  of  Savonarola,  the 
Renaissance  in  Italy  was  and  remained  pagan.  It 
was  different  with  the  humanistic  movement  in  Ger- 
many ;  and  this  may  partly  account  for  the  different 
results  in  Germany  and  in  Italy. 

England  received  an  impulse  from  both  quarters. 
One  of  the  first  to  bring  the  new  learning  thither 
was  John  Colet  who  had  come  under  both  the  in- 
fluence of  the  Renaissance  and  that  of  the  reforming 
work  of  Savonarola  at  Florence.  His  lectures  at 
Oxford,  differing  as  they  did  from  the  technical 
methods  of  the  Schoolmen,  and  taking  his  hearers 
straight  to  the  Scriptures  themselves,  produced  a 
profound  impression,  and  changed  the  direction  of 
theological  studies.  At  the  same  time  that  he  was 
producing  a  fresh  interest  in  the  New  Testament,  he 
was  urging  the  necessity  of  a  reform  in  the  lives  of 
the  clergy.  Both  in  Italy  and  in  England  he  had 
been  horrified  at  the  wickedness  and  profanity  of 
those  who  sat  in  high  places.  From  the  Pope  to  the 
cleric  of  the  lowest  degree  there  must  be  a  change 
in  all.  "  O  Jesus  Christ,"  he  prayed,  **  wash  for  us 
not  our  feet  only,  but  also  our  hands  and  our  head^  ^ 

One  of  those  who  came  under  the  influence  of 


'His  lectures  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  delivered  in  Oxford, 
about  1497,  Imve  been  edited  with  an  Eoglisii  translution  bj  Rev. 
J.  H.  Lupton  (1873). 


68  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

Colet  was  Thomas  More,  his  junior  by  about  fourteen 
years.  He  sympathized  deeply  with  his  teacher's  en- 
thusiasm for  learning,  and  with  his  zeal  for  reform, 
and  afterwards  became  a  conspicuous  figure  in  the 
early  days  of  the  Reformation.  With  them  was 
allied  Desiderius  Erasmus  of  Rotterdam,  perhaps  the 
most  distinguished  scholar  of  his  age ;  and  a  man  so 
important  in  reference  to  the  reforming  movement 
that  it  has  been  said  that,  whilst  Luther  hatched  the 
Ggg»  it  was  Erasmus  who  laid  it.  Colet  was  born  in 
1466,  Erasmus  in  1467,  and  More  in  1480. 

Early  in  life  Erasmus  was  left  an  orphan,  and 
entered  the  Augustine  Monastery  at  Steyn  where  he 
applied  himself  to  his  studies  with  great  energy  and 
success.  Finding  no  sympathy  there,  however,  he 
left,  and  by-and-by  came  to  Paris,  where  he  remained 
until  1498,  when  he  came  to  England.  At  Oxford 
he  made  friends  with  Grocyn,  who  had  the  chief 
hand  in  promoting  the  study  of  Greek  in  England, 
Linacre,  the  grammarian,  and  especially  with  Colet, 
who  was  then  teaching  in  the  University.  After  a 
year  and  a  half  he  removed  to  Paris,  and  spent  pix 
years  in  France  and  the  Netherlands,  writing,  while 
there,  his  "  Encheiridion,"  which  was  approved  by  the 
Principal  of  Louvain,  afterward  Pope  Hadrian  VI., 
but  which  was  subsequently  condemned  as  heretical 
by  the  Sorbonne.  In  1508  he  is  back  again  in  Eng- 
land, taking  his  degree  of  B.  D.  at  Cambridge.  After 
visiting  various  places  on  the  Continent,  he  returns 
to  England  in  1609,  where  he  w^rites  his  celebrated 
Encomium  Morice  ("  Praise  of  Folly,"  with  a  passing 
reference   to  his  friend  More).    At  Cambridge  he 


More  and  Erasmus.  59 

lectured  on  Greek.  In  1516  he  brought  out  the  first 
edition  of  his  Greek  Testament,  dedicated  to  Leo  X. 
Subsequently  he  made  the  acquaintance  of  von  Hut- 
ten,  the  German  humanist  and  friend  of  Luther,  with 
wiiom  he  afterward  had  considerable  disagreements, 
in  consequence,  partly,  of  his  refusing  to  take  part 
in  the  reforming  movement. 

Erasmus  has  been  charged  with  cowardice  in  stand- 
ing aloof  from  the  Lutheran  Reformation ;  but  there 
are  other  explanations,  and  those  more  reasonable, 
of  his  conduct.  Erasmus  was  a  man  of  a  critical 
turn  of  mind,  and  as  far  as  criticism  was  concerned, 
he  would  go  all  lengths  with  Luther  in  exposing  the 
evils  of  the  time,  and  especially  the  follies  and  vices 
of  the  religious  orders.  But  it  was  not  only  that  he 
lacked  the  religious  enthusiasm  of  the  great  German, 
but  he  was  only  partly  in  agreement  with  his  theology, 
and  wrote  a  very  strong  and  caustic  criticism  of 
Luther's  treatise  on  the  Bondage  of  the  Will.  More- 
over, Erasmus  thought  it  better  to  strive  for  the 
purification  of  the  Church  tlian  to  effect  a  rupture 
in  the  body.  As  regards  our  judgment  of  Erasmus, 
we  have  no  reason  to  suspect  his  sincerity;  and  there 
never  has  been  a  doubt  of  his  transcendent  ability. 

The  only  important  production  of  Erasmus  before 
the  reign  of  Henry  VHI.  was  his  Encheiridioii  Mil- 
itis  Christiani  ("Manual  of  a  Christian  Soldier") 
already  mentioned,  which  was,  in  fact,  a  very  power- 
ful attack  on  the  superstition  and  formalism  of  the 
times.  He  condemns  the  adoration  of  saints  and  the 
going  on  pilgrimages,  and  denounces  the  common 
error  of  supposing  that  the  mere  performance  of  ex> 


60  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

ternal  duties,  and  keeping  of  religious  observances 
constituted  a  really  godly  life.  If  Erasmus  was  not 
a  builder,  lie  was  at  least  an  iconoclast,  and  prepared 
material  which  others  might  work  up. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

BAPwLY  DAYS  OF  HENRY  VIII. 

|T  is  hardly  possible  to  approach  the  history 
of  the  early  days  of  the  Reformation  move- 
ment in  England  without  some  degree  of 
prejudice.  Whether  we  consider  the  char- 
acters of  the  prominent  persons  concerned,  or  the 
nature  of  the  incidents  upon  which  important  deci- 
sions were  made  to  turn,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  we  are 
in  danger  of  being  diverted  from  a  judgment  on  the 
essential  meaning  of  the  changes  which  were  intro- 
duced in  the  government  of  the  Church  and  in  her 
authoritative  creed  by  reflections  on  the  character 
and  conduct  of  the  men  by  whom  they  were  brought 
about.  It  may  be  as  well,  therefore,  at  this  point  in 
our  narrative,  to  refer  to  some  of  the  prejudices 
which  are  likely  to  intrude  themselves  upon  our 
notice  and  prevent  our  forming  a  just  estimate  of  the 
meaning  of  the  Reformation  movement  in  England, 
its  causes,  incidents,  and  results. 

Naturally  a  prominent  place  is  occupied  by  the 
character  of  Henry  VIII.  and  his  divorce  from  Cath- 
arine of  Aragon.  No  attempt  will  here  be  made  to 
defend  the  character  or  many  of  the  actions  of 
Henry  VIH.,  or  the  methods  by  which  he  brought 
al)out  many  changes  which  we  regard  as  in  them- 
selves beneficial.  Mr.  Fronde's  eloquent  apology  for 
the  King  has  indeed  brought  out  more  clearly  the 

61 


62  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

fact,  that  he  was,  in  general,  an  accurate  representa- 
tive of  the  sentiments  of  his  people  ;  but  he  has  pro- 
duced no  pt  nanent  change  in  the  judgment  of  the 
character  of  Henry. 

Granting  that,  as  he  advanced  in  years,  he  lost 
nearly  all  the  charms  of  his  youth,  that  he  became 
more  tyrannical,  sensual,  selfish,  brutal,  it  is  not  the 
character  of  this  man  with  which  we  have  to  deal, 
but  the  nature  and  meaning  of  the  movement  which 
received  its  most  powerful  impulse  during  his  reign, 
but  which  was  brought  to  completion  under  his  suc- 
cessors. Roman  Catholics  would  be  justly  aggrieved 
if  we  made  the  character  of  Boniface  VIII.  or  that 
of  Alexander  VI.  an  argument  .against  the  suprem- 
acy of  the  Pope ;  and  no  wise  Anglican  or  Protes- 
tant will  think  of  using  such  an  argument.  In  the 
same  way,  we  must  set  it  down,  once  for  all,  that  the 
character  of  Henry  VIII.  has  nothing  to  do  with  the 
merits  of  the  Reformation. 

Then,  again,  as  regards  the  divorce,  it  must  be 
distinctly  noted  and  understood,  that  the  King's 
contention  with  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  began 
long  before  there  was  any  thought  of  a  divorce ;  and 
further,  that  the  divorce  was  promoted  by  men  who 
were  Roman  Catholics,  in  the  sense  of  recognizing 
the  supremacy  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  holding 
the  distinctive  doctrines  of  the  Church  which  were 
afterwards  rejected  by  the  Reformers. 

With  regard  to  the  charge  of  Erastianism  brought 
against  some  of  the  methods  of  the  English  Refor- 
mation, it  may  be  remarked  that  several  of  the  great 
councils  of  early  times  arrived  at  their  decisions  and 


Preliminary  Rcmarlcs.  63 

decrees  under  similar  influences;  yet  this  has  not 
prevented  the  Church  from  accepting  them,  when 
they  commended  themselves  to  the  Christian  con- 
science; and  that  which  concerns  those  who  have  to 
decide  as  to  the  merits  of  the  work  of  the  Reforma- 
tion, is  not  so  much  the  character  of  the  human  in- 
struments by  whom  it  was  effected,  as  the  results 
which  they  brought  about,  and  the  authority  by 
which  they  are  comm'^nded  to  us. 

These  remarks  will  enable  the  reader  to  under- 
stand the  point  of  view  from  which  we  regard  the 
history  of  this  eventful  period.  To  enter  upon  such 
a  study  with  the  fixed  determination  to  find  every- 
thing bad  and  wrong  on  the  one  side  and  everything 
good  and  right  on  the  other,  whichever  the  side 
may  be,  can  lead  to  no  result  save  the  strengthening 
of  prejudice,  and  the  shutting  out  of  truth. 

No  one  doubts  that  changes  were  necessary  in 
several  respects.  The  moral  condition  of  the  Clergy 
and  of  the  Church  at  large  was  deplorable,  supersti- 
tions and  superstitious  practices  abounded  ;  and  the 
relations  between  the  see  of  Rome  and  the  national 
authorities  were  the  source  of  never  ending  conten- 
tion and  legislation.  It  was  a  matter  of  accident,  at 
which  point  the  quarrel  should  break  out;  but  it 
was  inevitable  that  it  should  come,  and  that  the  ele- 
ments just  specified  should  be  involved  in  it. 

Henry  VIII.  was  barely  eighteen  years  of  age 
when  he  came  to  the  throne  of  England  (April  22, 
1609)  and  he  was  endowed  with  many  qualities 
which  at  once  commended  him  to  the  admiration 
and  esteem  of  his  people.     He   was  handsome   in 


64  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

feature,  of  a  noble  presence,  and  attractive  in  man- 
ners, originally  too  of  a  generous  spirit,  however 
sadly  it  may  have  become  deteriorated  through  sen- 
suality, passion,  and  self-will.  He  was  also  a  man  of 
very  great  intellectual  ability,  with  a  scholarly  mind 
and  no  small  store  of  learning.  Moreover,  he  was  a 
man  of  high  courage  and  skilled  in  all  manly  sports. 
If  we  think  of  these  endowments  and  of  his  youth, 
we  shall  understand  the  enthusiasm  with  which  his 
accession  was  greeted  by  a  people  who  had  grown 
very  weary  of  the  parsimony  and  greed  of  his  father 
and  the  extortions  of  his  subordinates.  Nor  must 
we  forget  that,  with  all  his  faults  and  vices,  Henry 
VIII.  did  largely  retain,  to  the  end  of  his  life,  the 
confidence  of  his  people,  although  he  often  sorely 
tried  their  trust  and  patience. 

Very  early  in  his  reign  Henry  chose  as  his  coun- 
sellor, Thomas  Wolsey,  born  at  Ipswich,  in  1471, 
and  at  the  time  of  Henry's  accession,  thirty-eight 
years  of  age,  and  Dean  of  Lincoln.  He  speedily 
rose  to  the  highest  influence  and  authority,  becom- 
ing Archbishop  of  York  in  1514,  and  holding  several 
other  great  offices  in  commendam.  Shortly  after- 
wards (1516)  he  was  raised  to  the  Cardinalate  and 
made  Lord  Chancellor  of  England,  in  the  place  of 
Warham,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  resigned : 
he  was  also  made  the  Pope's  Legatua  a  latere^  first 
for  certain  terms  and  afterwards  for  life. 

Wolsey  was  a  great  man,  not  without  serious 
faults,  being  fond  of  magnificence  and  splendor,  and 
not  always  scrupulous  as  to  the  means  which  he  em- 
ployed.    If  his  greatest  fault  was  his  subserviency 


State  of  the  Clergy.  65 

to  the  King,  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  he  could  other* 
wise  have  preserved  his  place  and  power.  Henry 
might  take  counsel  with  his  great  minister,  and  in 
his  early  days  was  greatly  under  his  control ;  but 
there  is  no  reason  to  think,  that,  when  he  had  formed 
liis  purpose,  he  would  have  been  swayed  from  it  b}'' 
the  judgment  or  persuasion  of  Wolsey  or  any  one 
else. 

Mention  has  been  made  of  the  corrupt  condition 
of  the  Clergy  ;  and  a  very  remarkable  testimony  on 
this  subject  is  found  in  the  sermon  preached  before 
the  Convocation  of  Canterbury,  in  the  December  of 
1612,  by  Colet,  now  Dean  of  St.  Paul's.  Every 
form  of  evil  he  declared  to  be  rife  among  the  priest- 
hood. Clergymen  ran  almost  out  of  breath  from 
one  benefice  to  another,  from  the  less  to  the  greater. 
Not  only  this,  they  also  gave  themselves  to  feasts 
and  banquets,  were  addicted  to  hunting  and  hawk- 
ing. Nor  were  they  less  remarkable  for  their  covet- 
ousness.  It  was  a  terrible  indictment.  If  these 
were  the  shepherds,  what  must  the  flock  be  ?  Bet- 
ter than  the  shepherds,  it  is  said;  but  this  must 
always  be  doubtful,  unless,  as  Colet  suggests,  they 
had  excited  the  indignation  and  disgust  of  the  laity. 

One  of  the  grievances  felt  by  the  people  at  large 
was  a  privilege  of  which  we  have  already  heard  more 
than  once,  the  "Benefit  of  Clerg}'-,"  that  is  their  ex- 
emption from  trial  by  the  ordinary  civil  courts. 
Once  more,  under  Henry  VIII.,  an  attempt  was 
made  to  put  an  end  to  this  abuse ;  the  House  of 
Commons  passing  an  act  which  forbade  benefit  of 
clergy  to  ecclesiastics  found  guilty  of  sacrilege,  mur- 
E 


66  The  Anglican  Reformaiion. 

der,  or  robbery.  The  Lords  having  thrown  out  the 
bill,  it  was  modified  by  the  Commons — bishops, 
priests,  and  de.icons  being  exempted  from  its  oper- 
ation ;  and  in  this  form  it  became  law  (1513). 

A  remarkable  incident  occurred  about  this  time  in 
the  murder  in  prison  of  Richard  Hunne,  a  merchant 
tailor  of  London,  who  had  been  committed  on  a 
charge  of  heresy.  The  clerical  party  contended  that 
it  was  a  case  of  suicide :  the  jury  pronounced  it  to 
be  a  murder,  and  found  Dr.  Horsey,  the  Bishop  of 
London^s  chancellor,  an  accessory.  Several  disputes 
got  mingled.  Richard  Kidderminster,  Abbot  of 
Winchcombe,  in  a  sermon  at  PauFs  Cross,  made  an 
attack  on  the  recent  Act  of  Parliament,  declaring 
that  the  restriction  thereby  of  the  privileges  of  the 
Clergy  was  "  against  the  law  of  God  and  the  liberties 
of  the  Church;"  producing  at  the  same  time  a 
Decretal  which  affirmed  the  immunity  of  clerics 
from  secular  control  in  criminal  cases.  The  case 
was  argued  before  the  King,  the  Act  being  defended 
by  Dr.  Henry  Standish,  Warden  of  the  Observant 
Franciscans.  His  argument  was  that  no  Decretals 
had  effect  in  England  unless  they  had  been  legally 
ratified. 

Parliament  and  Convocation  were  now  arrayed 
against  each  other  (1515).  The  latter  summoned 
Dr.  Standish  to  defend  his  contention.  Standish 
appealed  to  the  King,  as  having  been  employed  by 
him.  Henry  heard  the  case  at  Blackfriars.  Standish 
was  supported  by  Dr.  Vesey,  Dean  of  the  Chapel 
Royal ;  and  they  contended  that  no  canons  of  the 
Church  were  binding  in  any  country  until  they  had 


The  Crown  and  the  Papacy.  67 

been  received  there.  The  judges  decided  tliat 
Convocation,  in  trying  Dr.  Standish,  had  rendered 
itself  liable  tu  the  penalties  of  Prsoniunire.  The 
Convocation,  while  throwing  itself  upon  the  mercy 
of  the  King,  indicated  the  dissatisfaction  of  its 
members  with  this  invasion  of  their  privileges. 
Subsequently  they  explained  that  they  had  not  cited 
Standish  for  what  he  had  said  as  King's  Advocate, 
but  for  his  utterances  at  other  times.  The  King 
made  it  quite  clear  that  he  understood  the  merits  of 
the  case,  and  warned  the  clergy  that,  as  in  past 
times  the  Kings  of  England  had  no  superior  but 
God,  so  he  would  in  like  manner  maintain  all  the 
rights  of  the  Crown.  The  case  is  one  of  considerable 
importance,  more  especLilly  as  it  shows  the  King's  esti- 
mate of  the  relations  of  the  Crown  and  the  Clergy, 
and  so  of  the  papacy  at  a  time  when  he  was  a  devoted 
Roman  Catholic  in  the  fullest  sense  of  the  word. 

Tlie  movement  against  Rome  was,  so  far,  political 
and  social,  and  not  at  all  doctrinal ;  but  it  was  not 
long  before  the  reforming  opinions  began  to  become 
current  among  the  people.  Luther  posted  his 
Theses  against  the  traffic  in  papal  indulgences  at 
the  door  of  the  Church  at  Wittenberg  in  1517 ;  and 
in  1520  he  published  his  letter  to  the  "Christian 
Nobility  of  Germany "  and  his  "  Babylonish  Cap- 
tivity of  the  Church."  Many  circumstances  tended 
to  make  the  people  of  England  sympathize  with  the 
protests  of  Luther.  The  old  feeling  of  independence, 
their  impatience  at  the  claims  of  the  clergy  for  ex- 
emption from  the  civil  courts,  their  dissatisfaction 
with    the    multiplication   of    Church    Courts,  and 


68  The  Anylican  Reformation. 

probably  some  undercurrent  of  Wycliffian  opinion 
and  sentiment,  combined  to  make  them  more  ready 
to  give  a  hearing  to  the  new  opinions,  even  if  they 
were  denounced  as  heretical. 

The  "  heresies  of  Luther"  began  to  spread  in  the 
University  of  Oxford,  and  to  cause  serious  alarm  to 
the  bishops.  Warham,  as  Chancellor  of  the  Uni- 
versity, wrote  to  Wolsey  as  papal  legate,  on  the 
circulation  of  unlicensed  books,  which  were  con- 
taminating both  of  the  Universities.  The  danger 
spreads.  A  monk  of  Bury  S.  Edmund's  preaches,  at 
Oxford,  a  sermon,  in  which  he  rails  against  cardinals 
and  bishops,  and  even  defends  some  of  the  opinions 
of  Luther.  Wolsey  was  wise  enough  to  know  that 
the  persecution  of  men  accused  of  heresy  was  likely 
to  spread  their  opinions ;  but  he  could  not  help  him- 
self. So,  in  concert  with  some  Oxford  divines,  he 
drew  up  a  declaration  condemnatory  of  Luther's 
doctrine,  and  caused  it  to  be  posted  on  St.  Mary's 
Church.  He  also  issued  a  proclamation  requiring 
that  all  books  by  Luther  should  be  sent  to  the 
bishop  of  the  diocese,  and  then  to  himself.  A  num- 
ber of  the  books  were  subsequently  burned  at  Paul's 
Cross,  Wolsey  being  most  unwilling  to  proceed 
against  the  persons  of  heretics,  and  hoping  that  this 
might  answer  his  purpose. 

Luther*s  tract  on  the  Babylonian  Captivity  of  the 
Church  is  of  special  interest  to  our  subject,  since  it 
called  forth  King  Henry's  book  in  reply  (1621), 
being  an  "  Assertion  of  the  Seven  Sacraments  against 
Martin  Luther."  The  Pope  received  the  book  with 
great  joy,  pronouncing  Luther  to  be  **a  most  filthy 


Defender  of  iJte  Faith,  60 


monster,"  and,  bestowing  upon  the  author  the  proud 
title  still  bonio  by  the  British  Sovereign,  Fidei 
Defensor^  "  Defeiuler  of  the  Faith."  It  is  not 
necessary  here  to  dwell  upon  the  King's  book  or  the 
Hefonner's  reply.  The  violence  of  both  may  be 
accounted  for  by  the  tasic  of  the  times.  The  chief 
reflection  induced  will  probably  bo  a  Bcntimeut  of 
satisfaction  that  these  fashions  have  passed  away. 
Among  the  faults  of  Wolsey  his  enemies  could 
never  with  justice  attribute  to  him  a  vindictive  or 
persecuting  spirit ;  and  he  did  his  best  to  repress  in 
others  the  desire  to  put  down  the  new  ojunions  by 
mere  force.  It  was  not  that  Wolsey  was  less  faith- 
ful to  the  established  doctrines  than  the  other 
bishops,  although  he  was  certainly  better  disposed  to 
the  new  learning;  but  his  hope  lay  in  the  deepening 
of  knowledge,  and  in  the  spread  of  learning,  espe- 
cially among  the  clergy;  and  to  this  aim  he  was  ever 
constant. 

Clement  VII.,  at  his  appointment  to  tlie  papacy, 
had  made  Wolsey  legate  for  life  (1523);  and  the 
latter  took  the  opportunity  of  getting  the  Pope's 
sanction  to  the  appropriation  of  certain  monastic 
funds  for  the  establishment  of  Cardinal's  College  at 
Oxford.  In  the  formation  of  the  college  body,  a 
number  of  Cambridge  men  were  brought  over,  most 
of  whom  were  tainted  with  Lutheran  views.  One  of 
them  shortly  left  to  join  Tyndale  who  had  gone-  to 
Germany  with  the  view  of  producing  a  translation  of 
the  New  Testament.  The  book  was  at  last  printed 
at  CiJln  and  Worms,  and  was  published  at  Worms 
in  1526  anonymously.     Great  numbers  of  copies 


70  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


^yere  sold  in  England,  in  spite  of  the  attempt  of  the 
ecclesiastical  authorities  to  seize  and  destroy  them. 
The  burning  of  the  books  (1627)  was  a  boon  to 
Tyndale,  as  it  enabled  him  to  bring  out  another  and 
more  accurate  edition  of  his  work.  In  most  cases 
those  found  in  possession  of  the  translations  were 
merely  required  to  carry  a  faggot  in  the  procession. 

The  case  of  Bilney  and  Arthur  was  more  serious 
(1527).  These  men  were  not  heretics  in  the  sense 
of  assailing  the  doctrines  of  the  Church,  or  the  sacra- 
ment of  tlie  Altar  in  particular;  but  they  were  un- 
measured in  their  denunciation  of  the  popular  su- 
perstitions of  the  time,  pilgrimages,  saint-worship,  the 
veneration  of  relics  and  shrines,  and  the  like.  And 
they  were  summoned  to  answer  to  charges  before 
Tunstall,  Bishop  of  London.  Arthur  gave  in  at  once. 
Bilney,  at  first,  defended  his  opinions;  but  after- 
wards recanted,  and  was  absolved.  Returning  to 
Cambridge,  he  became  convinced  of  his  disloyalty  to 
his  convictions,  and  again  began  to  preach  against 
superstitions.  He  was  condemned,  as  a  relapsed 
heretic,  by  the  Bishop  of  Norwich,  and  was  burned 
in  that  city.  There  seems  to  be  no  truth  in  the  as- 
sertion that  he  recanted  again  before  his  death. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

HENRY  AND  CATHARINE. 

HE  facts  concerning  the  divorce  of  Henry 
VIII.  from  Catharine  of  Aragon  are  now 
so  well  known  and  so  fully  attested  that 
very  few  points  remain  undecided,  and 
these  are  of  little  practical  importance.  Arthur,  the 
elder  brother  of  Henry  and  the  first  husband  of 
Catharine,  died  in  1502,  when  Catharine  was  only 
seventeen  and  Henry  not  twelve  years  of  age.  It  is 
believed  that  it  was  unwillingness,  on  the  part  of 
Henry  VH.,  to  pay  back  Catharine's  dower  that 
made  him  first  conceive  the  idea  of  marrying  her  to 
lier  husband's  younger  brother.  The  boy  prince 
was,  therefore,  almost  at  once  betrothed  to  Catharine, 
and  soon  after  his  father's  death,  they  were  married 
in  1509,  he  being  eighteen  and  the  princess  twenty- 
four.  Apparently  he  had  no  repugnance  to  the 
match,  for  which  a  dispensation  li.id  been  somewhat 
nn willingly  granted  by  Pope  Julius  II.  This  dis- 
pensation was  of  a  very  comprehensive  character, 
declaring  the  legality  of  the  marriage  to  Henry,  even 
in  case  of  the  union  witli  his  brother  having  been 
consummated.^     Henry  and  Catharine  seem  to  have 

'  It  is  perhaps  necessary  to  note  this  poia^,  as  it  is  often  dis- 
cussed in  the  proceedings.  Bishop  Burnet  gives  his  reasons  for 
h(>lieving  in  the  consummation.  Queen  Cutbarine  denied  it. 
But  the  Pope's  dispensation  provided  for  either  caso. 

71 


72  The  AnyUcan  Reformation. 

lived  quite  ha]>pily  togetlier  for  a  good  mjiny  years. 
Slie  bore  him  two  sons,  both  of  wliom  died.  Her 
tliird  cliild  was  tl>e  Princess  Mary,  afterwards  Queen 
of  Enghind. 

It  lias  been  vigorously  maintained  tliat  the  death 
of  Ids  chihlren  and  the  failure  of  Catharine  to  give 
him  a  male  heir  to  the  crown  worked  on  the  King's 
conscience  and  made  him  doubtful  of  the  lawfulness 
of  his  marriage  with  his  brother's  widow.  On  the 
other  hand,  this  idea  has  been  ridiculed  as  very  un- 
likely to  occur  to  a  man  of  Henry's  cliaracter,  and 
it  has  been  justly  pointed  out  that  those  scruples  had 
no  existence  luitil  after  Henry  had  fallen  in  love  with 
Anne  Boleyn.  It  must  indeed  be  conceded  as  a 
simple  fact  that  these  sen. oles  were  unknown  until 
Anno  Boleyn  appeared  on  the  scene ;  yet  it  is  quite 
possible  that  Henry  was  not  entirely  hypocritical  in 
assigning  his  scruples  of  conscience  as  a  reason  for 
seeking  a  divorce.  If,  however,  it  be  true,  and  it 
seems  probable,  that  Anne's  sister  Mary  had  been 
the  King's  mistress  before,  and  this  did  not  seem  an 
obstacle  to  his  union  with  Anne,  his  scruples  cannot 
possibly  have  been  very  deep. 

There  seems  to  be  some  doubt  as  to  Wolsey*s  part 
in  the  affair  at  the  beginning,  some  alleging  that  he 
rojoiced  at  the  thought  of  giviig  offence  to  Spain 
and  drawing  closer  the  alliance  with  France.  Others, 
however,  maintain  that  lie  was  at  first  averse  to  the 
divorce,  and  besought  the  King  to  abandon  the  idea  ; 
until,  fmu  Jig  that  lie  was  thoroughly  set  upon  it,  he 
gave  in  his  hearty  adhesion.  It  was  by  his  advice 
that  various  methods  were  tncd  for  bringing  about  ilio 


Catharine  and  the  Divorce.  73 


fulfilment  of  the  King's  design — not  so  much  to  get 
rid  of  his  wife  as  to  get  possession  of  Anne  BoI'^vmi. 

First  a  collusive  suit  before  the  legate  was  th«  it 
of  (1527);  but  this  foil  through.  Then  the  Knig 
endeavored  to  work  upon  the  fears  of  the  Queen, 
representing  that  they  had  been  living  in  sin,  and 
that  his  conscience  would  not  allow  him  to  continue 
the  connection.  Catharine  is  one  of  the  few  persous 
connected  with  these  transactions  whom  the  candid 
student  of  the  period  can  regard  with  almost  un- 
qualified satisfaction.  Her  position  was  clear  and 
consistent  throughout.  She  could  have  no  scruples 
as  to  the  lawfulness  of  her  union.  She  told  the 
King  she  could  take  God  to  witness  that  she  had 
always  been  a  true  and  loyal  wife.  "God  knows,'* 
she  said,  "^'that  when  I  came  to  your  bed,  I  was  a 
virgin,  and  I  put  it  to  your  own  conscience  to  say 
whether  it  was  not  so."  Here,  surelv,  was  an  end  of 
the  scruples.  Hut  Henry  was  resolved  on  marryii\g 
Anne  Boleyn,  who  played  her  part  with  great  skill, 
giving  the  King  such  encouragement  as  would  lead 
him  on,  yet  modestly  keeping  him  at  a  reasonable 
distance,  that  he  might  clearly  understand  the  condi- 
tions on  which  he  could  gain  possession  of  her. 

Wolsey  took  care  to  gain  over  Archbishop  War- 
ham,  who  had  indeed  been  opposed  to  the  marriage 
with  Catharine  from  the  beginning.  lie  also  con- 
trived to  keep  Queen  Catharine  apart  from  Bishop 
Fisher  of  llochester,  wlio  was  her  confessor,  and  to 
j)rejudice  the  Bishop  against  her.  The  Cardinal 
then  proceeded  to  France  to  advance  the  caiise ;  and 
induced   the  Pope  to  appoint  himself  and  another 


74  21ie  Anglican  Reformation. 

cardinal  commissioners  to  try  the  case  in  England. 
Ikit  tlie  permission  was  grunted  reluctantly,  and  it 
was  found,  when  examined,  to  be  inadequate. 

Another  attempt  was  made  by  Fox,  afterwards 
Kishop  of  Hereford,  and  Gardiner,  afterwards  of 
Winchester,  to  obtain  a  commission  with  full  powers 
to  deal  with  the  question  in  England.  But  the 
Emperor  Charles  V.  was  Queen  Catharine's  nephew, 
and  the  Pope  did  not  dcire  to  offend  him  (1528). 
Another  plan  was  devised — namely,  to  have  two 
commissioners,  one  to  hear  tlie  case,  and  the  other  to 
dissolve  the  marriage.  To  carry  out  the  latter 
project  a  Bull  was  entrusted  to  Campeggio  by  the 
Pope,  which  was  to  be  shown  to  the  King  and  some 
others,  and  then  to  be  burned. 

Wolsey  did  his  very  utmost  to  hasten  the  proceed- 
ings, but  he  could  not  content  the  King.  Nor  was 
lie  able  to  remove  the  scruples  of  the  English  bishops 
on  the  subject.  Nor  could  the  Queen  be  moved 
from  her  fixed  intention.  The  people,  too,  were 
commonly  on  the  side  of  Catharine.  At  last  the 
legatine  court  met  at  Blackfriars,  May  31, 1629.  The 
King  appeared  by  counsel,  the  Queen  in  person.  At 
a  second  session  both  appeared,  the  King  protesting 
his  scruples  of  conscience,  the  Queen  making  her 
appeal  to  him  in  language  already  quoted.  She  ap- 
pealed to  Rome  and  left  the  Court.  At  the  next 
session  she  was  pronounced  contumacious.  Bisuop 
Fisher,  who  had  found  out  the  truth  of  matters,  ap- 
peared  before  the  Court  and  declared  hia  willingness 
to  stake  his  life  on  the  validity  of  the  marriage. 
Campeggio  found  it  impossible  to  proceed,  and  on 


Wohey^s  Failure,  76 


July  23  he  pronounced  the  adjournment  of  the 
Court. 

Wolsey  had  done  his  very  utmost  for  liis  master, 
but  he  had  failed,  and  his  doom  was  pronounced. 
The  great  seal  was  taken  from  him.  By  a  shameful 
device  he  was  prosecuted,  under  the  Statute  of 
Praemunire,  for  holding  his  Court  as  legate.  The 
Cardinal  was  abject  in  his  submission,  although  his 
acts  had  been  done  in  the  King's  service.  He  may 
have  felt  that  he  had  used  too  great  display  in  the  day 
of  his  power,  and  he  offered  to  surrender  all  his  pos- 
sessions to  his  master.  A  pardon  was  extended  to 
him,  and  he  was  permitted  to  retain  his  Archbish- 
opric of  York.  But  here  his  old  influence  revived, 
and  the  jealousy  of  his  rivals  poisoned  the  mind  of 
the  King.  His  committal  to  the  tower  was  ordered 
on  a  charge  of  treason.  He  died  broken-hearted  at 
Leicester  (1530).  On  his  deathbed  he  spoke  those 
famous  words,  not  to  his  servant,  Thomas  Cromwell, 
but  to  the  Lieutenant  of  the  tower.  He  had  served 
his  King  with  all  his  heart.  How  he  had  served  his 
God,  that  God  alone  can  judge. 

There  now  appears  upon  the  scene  a  man  who  was 
to  exercise  a  profound  influence  on  the  fortunes  of 
the  Church  of  England  for  nearly  a  generation. 
Thomas  Cranmer  was  born  in  Nottiughamshire  in 
14S4,  and  therefore,  at  the  time  of  Wolsey's  fall, 
was  forty-five  years  of  age.  He  was  a  good  scholar 
and  a  man  of  extensive  learning.  The  most  serious 
fault  found  with  him  was  his  flexibility  in  judgment 
and  action.  In  regard  to  the  divorce  he  had  formed 
a  distinct  opinion.     He  told  Gardiner  and  Fox  that 


76  The  AnfjJican  Reformation. 

they  should  obtain  the  opinions  of  the  Universities 
of  Europe,  and  act  upon  them  by  holding  a  Court  in 
England.  When  the  King  lieard  of  this  advice,  he 
exclaimed:  "This  man  has  got  the  right  sow  by  the 
ear."  Cranmer  put  his  phin  into  writing,  and  then 
was  sent  to  Rome  by  the  King  to  apprise  the  Pope 
of  his  intentions.  There  lie  was  appointed  Grand 
Penitentiary  of  England ;  and  from  tiience  he  jro- 
ceeded  to  the  Universities  of  Italy,  to  obtain  their 
judgment  on  tlie  King's  cause.  Paris  was  the  most 
diflicult  to  manage,  but  ultimately  decided,  as  most 
of  the  others  did,  on  the  King's  side.  Oxford  and 
Cambridge,  in  spite  of  all  the  influence,  and  almost 
intimidation,  brought  to  bear  upon  them,  gave  the 
very  unsatisfactory  decision,  that  "  to  marry  a  de- 
ceased brother's  wife,  when  the  matrimony  had 
actually  been  consummated,  was  against  the  divine 
law."  This  was  not  at  all  what  the  King  wanted ; 
but  simply  a  declaration  that  the  papal  dispensation 
was  illegal. 

Next  comes  the  Pope's  decision  to  the  effect,  that, 
as  the  Queen  had  appealed  to  him,  and  the  King  had 
not  appeared,  the  case  could  proceed  no  furtlKU*. 
Tlie  Pope  also  remonstrated  with  the  English  Parlia- 
ment which  had  assumed  that  the  decision  of  the 
Universities  was  on  the  King's  side,  and  had  re- 
quested him  to  act  upon  it.  By  way  of  reply,  the 
King  issued  a  proclamation  forbidding  any  communi- 
cation on  the  ])art  of  his  subjects  with  the  Court  <»f 
Rome,  and  making  the  introduction  of  papal  Pulls 
punishable  with  imprisonment.     Here  the  King  was 


V,y   ^'TyirW  V"^       ""  >*Y'T'  1' 


Cranmer  Archbishop.  77 


exercising  his  legal  rights.  One  could  only  wish 
that  tlie  cause  had  been  better. 

The  clergy  were  apprehensive  that  the  measures 
taken  against  Wolsey,  under  the  Statute  of  PrsB- 
muiiire,  might  be  turned  against  themselves  and  in 
both  of  the  Convocations  they  had  a  majority  of 
votes  for  the  nullity  of  the  King's  marriage  with 
Catharine.  When  Parliament  met  in  January,  1531, 
it  was  Sir  Thomas  More  who  brought  before  tiio 
House  the  opinions  of  the  Universities.  Twelve  of 
them,  including  Paris,  Orleans,  Padua,  and  Bologna, 
had  declared  the  nullity  of  the  marriage.  The 
parliament  could  only  reaffirm  their  own  judgment 
which  the  Pope  had  condemned.  About  this  time 
the  King  was  privately  married  to  Anne  Boleyn. 

In  August  1632  Archbishop  Warham  died,  and 
the  King  nominated  Cranmer  to  Canterbury.  With 
apparent  and  probably  real  unwillingness  Cranmer 
accepted  the  honor  which  he  could  not  easily  liave 
rejected  when  offered  by  a  man  like  Henry  VHI. 
The  relations  to  Rome  were  still  indefinite,  and 
Cranmer,  perhaps  unwisely,  followed  the  usual  prac- 
tice of  applying  to  the  Pope  for  the  pall.  In  doing 
so  he  had  to  take  an  oath  of  canonical  obedience  to 
the  Pope.  It  is  true  that  he  declared  that  by  doing 
so  "he  did  not  intend  to  bind  himself  to  do  anything 
coutrar}'^  to  tlie  laws  of  God,  the  King's  prerogative, 
or  to  the  commonwealth  and  statutes  of  the  King- 
dom ; "  but  this  was  hardly  the  sense  in  which  the 
Pope  understood  the  oath.  On  March  30,  1533, 
Cranmer  was  consecrated  Archbishop. 

On  March  28,  1533,  the  upper  hour;e  of  the  convc- 


78  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

cation  of  Canterbury  nnanimously  voted  the  nullity 
of  the  marriage  without  the  qualifying  phrase  in- 
troduced by  the  universities.  The  lower  house  was 
less  pliable,  but  a  sufficient  acquiescence  was  ob- 
tained. 

On  the  8th  of  May  Cranmer  opened  a  court  at 
Dunstable,  to  which  he  cited  the  Queen  ;  and,  as  she 
did  not  appear,  she  was  declared  contumacious. 
After  waiting  for  some  days,  Cranmer  says,  "On 
the  morrow  after  Ascension  day  I  gave  final  sentence 
therein,  how  that  it  was  indispensable  for  the  Pope 
to  licence  any  such  marriages."  Queen  Catharine 
received  the  intimation  of  what  had  taken  place  with 
the  same  inflexible  resolution  she  had  shown 
throughout.  She  would  not  consent  to  be  called 
Princess  Dowager,  she  was  the  wife  of  the  King.  A 
few  days  later  the  Archbishop  pronounced  the  valid- 
ity of  the  King^s  marriage  to  Anne  Boleyn  and  on 
Whitsunday  (Juno  1,  1533)  he,  assisted  by  six  other 
bishops  and  many  nobles,  set  the  crown  upon  her 
head.  About  three  months  later  (September  5, 1583) 
the  Princess  Elizabeth  was  born. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  SUPREMACY. 

ING  HENRY  VHI.  may  be  bM  to  have 
pursued  a  double  course  which  to  the 
mind  of  later  times  would  seem  to  involve 
a  contradiction.  On  the  one  hand,  he  made 
up  his  mind  to  throw  off  the  supremacy  of  the 
Roman  see,  on  the  other  to  maintain  what  we 
should  call  distinctively  Roman  doctrine ;  and  both 
of  these  aims  he  pursued,  if  not  with  perfect  con- 
sistency, yet  without  any  real  relinquishment  of  his 
plan. 

The  reforming  doctrines  were  still  finding  their 
way  into  England ;  and  one  of  the  Cambridge  men 
who  had  been  brought  to  Cardinal's  college,  John 
Fryth,  became  suspected  of  Lutheranicim,  but  escaped 
to  the  Continent  and  became  a  fellow-worker  with 
Tyndale.  An  attack  had  been  made  upon  the  doc- 
trine of  Purgatory,  and  Sir  Thomas  More,  Bishop 
Fisher,  and  a  brother-in-law  of  More,  had  come  out 
in  defence.  Fryth,  after  writing  in  opposition  to 
Purgatory  and  these  its  defenders,  paid  a  visit  to 
England,  when  he  was  arrested  and  cast  into  the 
Tower.  As  it  was  not  quite  easy  to  obtain  a  convic- 
tion against  him  on  the  ground  of  his  tract,  he  was 
inveigled  into  giving  to  a  visitor  a  treatise  on  the 
Eucharist  which  he  had  written  during  his  imprison- 
ment.   More  wrote  briefly  in  defence  of  the  tradi- 

19 


»    1 


80  The  AntjUcan  Reformation. 

tional  doctrine,  when  Fryth  replied  with  great  mod- 
eration, yet  firmly  rejecting  the  adoration  of  the 
Sacrament.  An  opportunity  was  given  him  of  es- 
caping ;  but  he  declined  to  avail  himself  of  it.  He 
was  condemned  by  a  court  of  which  Cranmer  was 
president,  and  was  burned  at  Smithfiold,  July  4, 1538. 

More  was,  at  this  time,  the  principal  controversi- 
alist on  the  Roman  Catholic  side,  writing  against 
Tyndale  and  others,  but  apparently  with  little  of  the 
persecutor's  spirit.  He  had,  indeed,  ceased  to  be 
chancellor  when  Fryth  was  bumed.  One  notable 
person  appears  among  the  accused  of  this  period. 
Hugh  Latimer,  afterwards  the  most  sturdy  of  the 
defenders  of  the  reformed  doctrine,  was  already  sus- 
pected. In  1632  he  appeared  before  convocation 
and  was  required  to  sign  certain  articles.  It  appears 
that  his  mind  was  not  yet  fully  made  up,  and  after 
Borno  hesitation  and  delay  he  signed  two  of  them 
and  was  absolved.  Again  he  was  accused,  and  es- 
caped. It  is  hardly  fair  to  accuse  him  of  cowardice. 
The  reformed  ideas  were  evidently  working  in  his 
mind ;  but  he  had  not  yet  that  assured  conviction  of 
their  truth  that  could  justify  him  in  maintaining 
them  in  opposition  to  the  general  voice  of  the  Church. 

About  this  time  there  came  a  new  influence  into 
the  government  of  the  country  which,  for  a  time, 
promised  to  put  the  Church  on  the  way  of  doctrinal 
reformation,  or  at  least  to  obtain  greater  toleration 
for  Protestant  opinion.  This  was  the  work  of  Thomas 
Cromwell,  who  had  been  among  the  most  devoted 
of  the  servants  of  Cardinal  Wolsey,  and  after  his 
fall  had  passed  into  the  service  of   the  King,  be- 


Thomas  Cromwell.  81 

coining  his  secretary  and  a  privy  councillor.  Crom- 
well had,  at  an  early  period,  made  up  his  mind  as  to 
the  measures  to  he  taken  with  the  Church.  lie  had 
been  VVolsey's  cliief  instrument  in  tlie  suppression  of 
some  of  the  smaller  religious  houses,  the  funds  of 
which  had  gone  to  the  building  of  his  colleges. 
When  the  correspondence  with  the  Pope  in  reference 
to  the  divorce  took  place,  Cromwell  gave  it  as  his 
opinion  that  the  King  should  proclaim  himself  su- 
preme head  of  the  Church  instead  of  the  Pope;  and 
by  his  own  authority  sanction  the  divorce.  For  a 
time  the  King  adopted  otiier  councils  ;  but  the  policy 
of  Cromwell  was  yet  to  take  effect.  His  design  was 
to  raise  tlio  King  to  absolute  authority  in  Church 
and  State.  It  was  by  his  advice  that  the  clergy 
were  brought  to  obedience  in  1531  by  threats  of  the 
penalties  of  Prajmunire.  It  was  now  determined  to 
get  the  Bishops  and  Clergy  to  promulgate  the  view 
of  the  relation  of  tlie  Pope  to  the  Church  which  for- 
bade his  interference  with  its  government  in  other 
lands.  Tliat  the  Pope  had  no  more  jurisdiction  in 
England  than  any  other  Bishop  was  to  be  tauglit 
throughout  the  country  and  preached  at  Paul's 
Cross  from  Sunday  to  Sunday.  Tiio  Act  for  the 
restraint  of  appeals  to  Rome  was  ordered  to  be  set 
up  in  every  Church  of  the  land.  The  mayor, 
aldermen,  and  councillors  of  the  city  of  London 
were  also  to  help  in  making  it  known,  that  he  who 
called  himself  Pope  was  but  the  Bishop  of  Rome, 
and  had  no  more  authority  in  England  tlian  any 
other  Bishop. 

In  order  to  give  general  effect  to  these  principles 
F 


82  21ie  Arifjllcan  Rcformallon, 


the  King  issued  a  circular  letter  to  the  Justices  of 
the  pe.ice,  setting  forth  that  the  Clergy  in  their 
convocations  hiid  already  recognized  him  as  "Su- 
preme Head,  immediately  under  God,  of  the  Church 
of  England,"  denouncing  all  ohedienco  to  any  for- 
eign jurisdiction,  whether  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  or 
any  other.  For  this  reason,  he  explained,  he  had 
required  the  bishops  of  the  various  dioceses  to  make 
known  that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Roman  Bishop 
was  a  usurpation,  and  that  tlie  King's  supremacy 
was  to  be  maintained  ;  and  that  they  should  remove 
from  the  oflico  books  of  the  Church  any  recognition 
there  occurring  of  the  unlawful  claims  of  the  papacy. 
This  letter  was  issued  on  June  9,  1534. 

The  King  desired  that  the  magistrates  should  see 
that  the  Clergy  carried  out  his  orders ;  but  they  had 
not  waited  for  this  incitement.  On  March  31,  1634, 
the  Convocation  of  Canterbury  declared  "  That  the 
Roman  Bishop  hjis  no  greater  jurisdiction  given  to 
Inm  by  God  in  this  Kingdom  than  any  other  foreign 
bishop."  To  the  same  effect  the  Convocation  of 
York  (June  1,  1534)  declared  "That  the  Roman 
Bishop  has  not  in  the  Holy  Scriptures  an}-  greater 
jurisdiction  in  the  Kingdom  of  England  than  any 
other  foreign  bishop."  The  two  Universities  and  the 
bishops  declared  on  the  same  side  ;  and  it  is  of  in- 
terest to  remember  that  Gardiner  and  Bonner  were, 
at  this  time,  staunch  upholders  of  the  Royal  Suprem- 
acy. 

The  King  and  Cromwell  were  entirely  agreed  on 
the  question  of  the  Royal  Supremacy  ;  but  the  latter 
was  bent  on  doctrinal  reforms  to  which  the  King 


The  Ewjlish  Bible.  83 

was  opposed ;  and  this  may  account  for  the  fact 
that,  after  Cronnvell's  fall,  the  King's  action  in  this 
respect  was  retrograde.  One  great  step  was  taken 
by  the  fulfilment  of  the  promise  to  provide  for  the 
people  an  English  translation  of  the  sacred  Scri})* 
tures ;  and  Miles  Coverdale's  version,  produced  with 
the  help  of  Tyndale,  was  published  in  October,  1535. 
The  translation  was  still  from  the  Vulgate.  In  the 
same  year  the  first  reformed  book  of  private  devo- 
tions, called  the  Primer,  was  put  forth.  It  con- 
demned certain  superstitious  practices,  yet  did  not 
entirely  forbid  the  invocation  of  Saints.  In  connec- 
tion  with  the  progress  of  reformed  opinion,  it  should 
be  mentioned  that,  in  1534,  fourteen  Anabaptists 
were  found  guilty  of  heresy  and  burned,  two  at 
Smithfield,  and  the  rest  throughout  the  country,  as 
a  warning  !  Among  those  who  opposed  the  divorce 
and  the  reformation  one  should  be  mentioned,  not 
80  much  for  her  own  sake,  as  for  the  manner  in 
which  she  was  used .  by  others.  This  was  Elizabeth 
Barton,  the  "  Nun  of  Kent,"  at  first  apparently  a 
pious  but  hysterical  woman,  whose  fits  were  regarded 
by  some  as  a  kind  of  divine  ecstasies.  These  were 
displayed  in  public  by  two  designing  men,  her  own 
parish  priest  named  Master  and  a  Canon  of  Canter- 
bury called  Docking,  who  made  money  by  them. 
Among  other  "  revelations  "  she  spoke  by  pretended 
inspiration  against  the  divorce.  More  examined  her 
and  recommended  her  to  keep  clear  of  such  ques- 
tions. Fisher,  unfortunately,  believed  not  merely  in 
her  sincerity,  but  in  her  prophetic  gifts  as  well.  It 
was  one  of  the  few  errors  that  Fisher  committed. 


8J:  7* lie  Anylican  Reformation. 

The  nun  afterward  confessed  that  she  had  no  real 
visions.  We  can  quite  understand  that  her  own 
hallucinations  might  be  so  mingled  with  the  sug- 
gestions of  her  prompters  that  she  might  find  it 
difficult  to  distinguish  and  form  a  judgment  upon 
them.  She,  her  two  guides,  and  others  implicated 
were  executed  for  treason  ;  and  Fisher  had  a  narrow 
escape.  The  misguided  woman  confessed  her  fault 
at  her  death ;  but  said  truly  enough  that  those 
"  learned  men  "  were  more  to  be  blamed  than  she, 
having  much  praised  her,  and  led  her  to  imagine  that 
it  was  the  Holy  Ghost  who  spoke  by  her,  so  that  she 
*••  being  puffed  up  with  their  praises,  fell  into  a  certain 
pride  and  foolish  fantasy,"  and  thought  she  might 
feign  what  she  would. 

Among  the  very  worst  of  the  actions  of  Henry 
VHI.  was  the  passing  of  two  measures,  both  in  1634, 
one  the  Succession  Act  and  the  other  the  Treason 
Act.  The  Succession  Act  was  to  legalize  the  oath 
already  prescrb^d  and  taken  to  insure  the  succession 
to  the  throne  I  the  children  of  Queen  Anne.  Re- 
fusal to  take  this  oath  on  the  part  of  More  and 
Fisher  was  punished  with  forfeiture  of  their  prop- 
prty  and  personal  liberty  to  the  Crown.  The  Treason 
Statute,  known  as  the  Verbal  Treason  Act,  made  it 
high  treason  to  be  silent.  It  was  construed  as 
"  malicious  silence,"  and  was  to  be  punished  with 
death.  Under  this  law  the  monks  of  the  Charter- 
house were  destroyed,  ten  being  put  to  death,  and 
the  rest  dying  in  prison  or  being  dispersed. 

The  King's  animosity  against  More  and  Fisher 
never  slumbered ;  and  it  is  impossible  for  his  most 


More  and  Fisher.  85 

ardent  advocates  to  defend  his  conduct  in  this  case. 
It  would  not  be  difficult  to  show  that  Fisher  was 
imprudent,  and  tl»at  More  had  been  inconsistent. 
As  chancellor,  he  had  at  least  officially  brought  the 
question  of  divorce  before  parliament.  Like  other 
men  of  his  time,  he  had  taken  part  in  persecution. 
But  the  real  offences  of  the  men  were  their  doubts 
about  the  divorce  and  the  Royal  supremacy.  While 
the  King  was  meditating  how  best  to  proceed  against 
them,  his  anger  was  inflamed  by  the  Pope  (Paul  III.) 
conferring  upon  Fisher  the  Cardinal's  hat  (May, 
1535) ;  and  he  determined  no  longer  to  put  off  his 
revenge.  Every  means  was  taken  to  entrap  tho 
bishop  and  the  ex-chancellor  into  expressions  which 
might  be  used  against  them.  There  seems  to  be 
some  confusion  in  the  reports  of  their  utterances, 
but  the  general  outcome  of  the  conflict  is  clear 
enougli.  More  and  Fisher  were  willing  to  accept 
the  settled  order  of  things.  They  would  acknowl- 
edge Anne  as  Queen  and  her  children  as  successors 
to  the  throne ;  they  would  live  quietly  under  the 
changed  order  in  Church  as  well  as  in  State.  But 
they  would  neither  commit  themselves  to  any  formal 
opinion  in  regard  to  the  King's  first  marriage  and 
the  divorce ;  nor  would  they  consent  to  the  substi- 
tution of  the  royal  Supremacy  for  that  of  the  Pope. 
Silence  was  of  no  avail  in  such  a  case.  It  was 
"  malicious  silence  "  and  treason.  Fisher  was  con- 
demned June  12,  and  executed  June  22,  in  his 
eightieth  year ;  and  More  followed.  Every  attempt 
was  made,  by  Cranmer  and  others,  to  induce  More  to 
take  the  oath  of  Supremacy.     The  story  of  his  last 


86  The  Anylican  Reformation. 

days,  of  his  determined  refusal  and  cheerful  con- 
templation of  the  alternative  before  him,  has  often 
been  told.  He  was  but  fifty-five  years  of  age,  but 
life  was  not  so  dear  to  him  as  honor.  His  judicial 
murder  took  place  July  6,  1535. 

It  was  now  war  to  the  knife  between  the  King  and 
the  Pope.  When  the  latter  found  how  little  he  hud 
advanced  his  cause  b}'^  the  favor  he  had  shown  to 
Fisher,  he  proceeded  to  meet  violence  with  violence. 
He  drew  up  a  Bull  of  excommunication  against 
Henry,  declaring  him  deposed,  and  laying  the  King- 
dom under  an  interdict.  But  the  days  of  King 
John  had  gone  by  and  were  not  to  return.  The 
Bull,  kept  back  for  a  time  b}'  tlie  influence  of  tlie 
French  King,  was  not  actually  launched  until  1538. 
Still  the  feeling  on  the  continent  was  so  strong  that 
Cromwell  took  pains  to  explain  to  some  of  the 
foreign  powers,  with  whom  he  wished  the  English 
government  to  stand  well,  the  reasons  for  what  had 
been  done. 

It  was  about  this  time  tliat  a  controversy  took 
place  on  the  Royal  Supremacy  between  Cardinal 
Pole  on  the  one  side,  and  Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Win- 
cliester,  supported  by  Bonner,  then  Archdeacon  of 
Winchester,  on  tlie  other.  This  controversy  is  not 
only  of  importance  in  itself,  but  it  is  eventful  as  hav- 
ing led  to  one  of  Henry's  worst  crimes,  the  judicial 
murder  of  the  Countess  of  Salisbury.  This  lady  was 
the  daughter  of  the  Duke  of  Clarence ;  so  that  Pole 
and  the  King  were  second  cousins.  The  King  had  a 
great  favor  for  his  relative  and  in  many  ways  showed 
this  favor  by  giving  him  various  ecclesiastical  offices. 


Cardinal  Pole.  87 


Ileniy  had  been  greatly  disappointed  at  Pole's  refusal 
to  help  forward  the  matter  of  the  divorce,  and  it  be- 
came unsafe  for  him  to  remain  in  England.  While 
living  in  Italy  he  wrote  a  treatise  on  "  Ecclesiastical 
Unity"  in  reply  to  a  defence  of  the  Royal  Suprem- 
acy by  Dr.  Sampson,  Dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal,  which 
gave  still  greater  offence,  and  rendered  it  impossible 
for  him  to  return  to  England.  He  got  a  Cardinal's 
hat,  but  lost  his  English  benefices  and  was  declared 
guilty  of  treason.  Gardiner  replied  to  Pole  in  a 
treatise  "  On  true  obedience,"  maintaining  that  the 
King  was  supreme  over  all  national  affairs,  ecclesi- 
astical as  well  as  civil.  "  He  is  a  prince  of  his 
whole  people,  not  of  a  part  of  it,  and  he  governs 
them  in  all  things,  not  in  some  only;  and  as  the 
people  constitute  the  Church  in  England,  so  he  must 
needs  be  the  supreme  head  of  the  Church,  as  he  is 
the  supreme  head  of  the  people."  Truly  the  leaders 
on  both  sides  in  the  Reformation  conflict  were 
about  equally  disqualified  from  twitting  their  oppo- 
nents with  inconsistency  or  fickleness.  In  the  case  of 
Gardiner,  as  in  that  of  Cranmer  and  Wolsey,  al- 
lowance must  be  made  for  the  imperious  will  of 
Henry,  which  seemed  to  have  the  power  of  beating 
down  all  opposition. 

It  might  be  supposed  that  the  Royal  Supremacy 
was  now  adequately  asserted,  enforced,  and  acknowl- 
edged; and  that,  the  King  being  recognized  as  "over 
all  causes  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil  Supreme," 
the  controversy  might  cease.  But  unfortunately  the 
King  was  not  contented  to  administer  the  laws  of  the 
Church:  he  wanted  to  make  his  own  will  felt  di- 


88  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

rectly,  through  the  whole  Church  ;  and  he  began  to 
devise  measures  to  tliis  end.  The  work  was  begun 
by  the  appointment  of  Cromwell  as  Vicar-General 
(1535),  and  his  commission,  on  the  King's  behalf, 
"  to  treat  and  examine  all  causes  ecclesiastical,  and 
to  exercise,  provide,  and  exert  all  and  all  manner  of 
jurisdiction,  authority,  or  power  ecclesiastical,  which 
belongs  to  him  as  supreme  head."  The  commission 
was  so  extensive  that  it  gave  the  Vicar-General  or 
those  appointed  by  him  power  to  visit  all  the 
Churches,  and  make  inquiry  respecting  their  incum- 
bents, whom  they  might  suspend  or  deprive.  They 
might  also  make  laws  for  the  government  of  religious 
houses,  direct  and  confirm  the  election  of  bishops,  and 
indeed  exercise  universal  and  unlimited  authority. 
In  addition,  the  jurisdiction  of  tlie  bishops  in  their 
dioceses  was  suspended  until  the  visitation  should  be 
completed,  their  jurisdiction  being^ restored  to  them 
by  royal  licence. 

It  might  be  said  that  these  measures  were  a  nec- 
essary outcome  of  the  theory  of  the  Royal  Su- 
premacy. Where  so  great  a  change  had  been  made, 
it  might  seem  necessary  to  make  clear  the  relations 
established  by  the  new  order  of  things.  But  the 
changes  were  not,  in  reality,  so  great  as  they  might 
be  made  to  appear.  Tlie  Pope  was  declared  to  be 
Bishop  of  Rome  only,  and  not  universal  bishop;  but 
his  primacy  was  not  called  in  question.  Appeals  to 
Rome  were  forbidden ;  but  this  had  been  done  re- 
peatedly in  former  reigns;  and,  if  the  Pope  should 
abstain  from  fulminating  excommunications  and  in- 
terdicts, it  might  still  be  found  convenient  to  allow 


The  Papacy  and  the   Croivn.  89 

appeals,  in  certain  cases,  to  be  carried  before  his 
court.  The  facility  with  which  the  whole  policy 
of  Henry  VIII.  was  reversed  under  his  daughter 
Mary  is  sufficient  to  show  how  little  had  been  al- 
tered in  the  general  machinery  of  the  Church. 
There  was,  therefore,  no  necessity  for  these  sweeping 
measures.  The  supremacy  of  the  King  should  have 
been  exercised,  as  it  had  been  before,  through  the 
lawfully  constituted  courts,  and  any  changes  in 
those  courts  should  have  been  made  in  a  regular 
manner.  But  this  was  not  the  view  of  Henry  or  his 
Minister.  With  them  the  Supremacy  meant  autoc- 
racy; and  the  reign  of  Henry  Ylll.  became  a  tyr- 
anny. 


CHAPTER  X. 

THE  EELIGIOUS   HOUSES. 

EFERENCE  lias  already  been  made  to  the 
condition  of  the  monastic  orders  in  the 
fifteenth  and  sixteenth  centuries.  It  was 
quite  certain  that  some  change  would  be 
effected  either  in  their  number  or  in  their  constitu- 
tion. It  was  not  merely  that  they  had  absorbed  a 
very  large  amount  of  the  property  of  the  country, 
in  many  cases  alienating  the  endowments  of  the 
jmrochial  clergy,  and  often  witliout  providing  for  the 
discharge  of  their  duties ;  but  many  of  the  religious 
houses  had  become  very  corrupt  in  principle  and  life. 
Of  these  things  there  can  be  no  doubt  at  all ,  there 
are  abundant  testimonies  to  the  facts  given  by  those 
who  were  deeply  attached  to  the  institution  of 
monasticism. 

The  suppression  of  the  religious  houses  may,  there- 
fore, to  a  large  extent,  have  become  a  necessity. 
Whether  it  need  have  been  carried  so  far  may,  how- 
ever, be  a  question  ;  and  there  is  no  doubt  at  all 
tiiat,  in  many  cases,  it  was  carried  out  with  great  in- 
justice and  with  needless  harshness.  Nor  can  it  be 
doubted  that  those  who  aided  in  the  work  of  sup- 
pression were  largely  influenced  by  greed — the  de- 
sire of  appropiating  the  possessions  of  the  religious. 
It  may  be  convenient  to  have  these  points  in  mind 
when  w^e  are  considering  the  progress  of  the  work. 

80 


Difficulties  of  the   Worh.  91 

The  King's  action  in  the  matter  was  stimulated  by 
his  want  of  money  for  the  defence  of  the  Kingdom ; 
as  he  was  apprehensive  of  a  war  with  the  Emperor. 

When  it  is  remembered  that  there  were  more  than 
six  hundred  of  these  houses  in  the  country,  it  might 
have  seemed  an  easy  thing  to  suppress  at  least  a 
number  of  them.  But  tlie  difficulties  were  consider- 
able. The  Abbots  and  Friars  of  these  houses  were 
often  connected  with  the  great  families  of  the  land ; 
the  buildings,  many  of  them  of  exquisite  beauty, 
were  endeared  to  the  hearts  of  the  people.  More- 
over, in  times  ignorant  of  a  poor  law,  they  were  al- 
most a  necessity  for  the  relief  of  the  destitute. 

Something  had  been  done  towards  diminishing  the 
privileges  of  the  houses  by  the  Acts  of  Parliament 
which  cut  off  all  departments  of  the  Church  from 
the  see  of  Rome,  and  so  gave  to  the  King  the  power 
to  abolish  concessions  made  to  them  by  the  Pope. 
But  it  was  determined  to  carry  the  matter  much 
further,  and  the  method  adopted  was  to  institute  a 
visitation  of  all  the  houses  by  commissioners  ap- 
pointed by  the  Crown,  that  is  to  say,  by  Cromwell ; 
the  principal  of  the  visitors  of  the  monks  being 
Leighton,  Lee,  and  London,  Thornton  Bishop  of 
Dover  being  over  the  visitors  of  the  friars.  The  visi- 
tation began  in  October,  1535,  and  ended  about  three 
years  later. 

The  instructions  given  to  the  Commissioners  em- 
braced eighty-six  articles,  and  had  reference  to  the 
origin,  character,  rules,  and  observances  of  the  dif- 
ferent foundations.  They  were  required  to  ascer- 
tain whether  the  members  knew  their  rules,  espe- 


92  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

cially  the  three  vows  of  poverty,  chastity,  and  obedi- 
ence, and  observed  them:  whether  any  of  them 
kept  any  money  without  the  Master's  knowledge : 
whether  they  kept  company  with  women,  within  or 
without  the  Monastery,  or  if  there  were  any  back 
doors  by  which  women  came  within  the  precinct: 
whether  they  had  any  boys  lying  by  them,  and  the 
like.  Then  with  regard  to  the  buildings  and  furni- 
ture, they  were  to  ascertain  the  state  of  the  fabric 
and  the  plate,  of  the  convent  seal  and  the  writings 
of  the  house,  and  further,  whether  hospitality  was 
exercised.  In  regard  to  nunneries,  they  were  to  as- 
certain whether  any  men  conversed  with  the  Sisters 
alone  without  the  leave  of  the  Abbess,  whether  they 
had  any  familiarity  with  religious  men,  whether  they 
wrote  love-letters,  whether  the  Confessor  was  a  dis- 
creet and  learned  man  and  of  good  reputation. 

Henry  VIII.  was  not  the  first  to  undertake  the 
dissolution  of  Monasteries.  In  the  year  1532  the 
Pope  issued  a  Bull  for  the  dissolution  of  certain  mon- 
asteries and  setting  up  bishoprics  with  the  funds ; 
and  in  the  following  year  the  Priory  of  Christ 
Church  near  Aldgate  was  dissolved,  and  given  to 
the  Lord  Chancellor,  Sir  Thomas  Audley.  The 
Commissioners,  therefore,  had  precedent  for  their 
work. 

It  is  extremely  difficult  to  form  anything  like  a 
trustworthy  judgment  on  the  reports  of  the  visitors 
of  the  religious  houses.  Several  of  tliem  were  men 
of  notoriously  bad  character,  and  took  bribes  from 
the  houses  which  they  visited ;  they  do  not  seem  to 
have  taken  the  evidence,  which  they  collected,  in  any 


Corrupt  State  of  the  Houses.  98 

regular  and  formal  way ;  and  they  probably  did  their 
best  to  return  such  reports  as  were  expected  of 
them.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  impossible  that  their 
statements  should  have  been  received  and  acted 
upon,  some  of  them  without  a  protest  from  the  in- 
culpated persons,  unless  there  had  been  a  consider- 
able element  of  truth  in  the  reports.  Some  of  the 
houses  were  even  dissolved  at  their  own  request, 
either  because  they  were  convicted  of  irregularities 
or  because  they  were  unwilling  to  have  their  rules 
made  more  stringent.     Some  examples  may  be  given. 

A  surprise  visit  was  paid  to  the  Abbot  of  Laugden, 
and  his  door  being  suddenly  broken  open,  his  mis- 
tress was  discovered  with  him,  whilst  a  monastic 
habit  found  in  the  apartment  showed  that  she  passed 
fur  a  younger  brother  of  the  societ3^  Shortly  after 
this  discovery,  the  Abbot  and  ten  monks  signed  a 
resignation,  representing  that  the  revenue  of  tlie 
house  was  so  diminished  and  they  were  so  seriously 
in  debt,  that  it  must  be  ruined  temporally  and  spir- 
itually unless  it  obtained  relief,  and  therefore  they 
resigned  it  into  the  King's  hands.  This  appears  to 
have  been  the  first  resignation.  A  great  many  of 
the  religious  houses  are  reported  as  being  seriously 
in  debt. 

Against  a  good  many  of  the  houses  no  complaint 
seems  to  have  been  made  ;  but  great  disorders  were 
discovered  in  a  large  number  of  them.  Many  asked 
to  be  released,  because  they  had  taken  the  vow 
against  their  will.  Sometimes  quarrels  had  arisen 
between  different  factions  in  a  house.  In  some 
houses  they  found  tools  for  coining  money.     Not 


04  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

only  illicit  intercourse  between  the  sexes  seemed  to 
be  common,  but  also  unnatural  vices. 

Although  the  greater  Monasteries  had  been  in- 
cluded in  the  investigation,  the  King  and  Cromwell 
thought  it  wiser  to  begin  with  the  smaller  ones, 
many  of  which  were  so  impoverished  by  bad  man- 
agement and  perhaps  also  by  laxness  and  indulgence 
in  the  collection  of  their  rents,  that  they  had  scarcely 
the  means  of  subsistence.  The  Bill  for  the  Sup- 
pression of  Monasteries  having  less  than  £200  a 
year  passed  into  law  in  February,  1536,  and  waa 
speedily  acted  npon. 

Whether  or  not  the  suppression  of  these  houses 
can  be  justified,  no  defence  can  ue  offered  for  the 
manner  in  which  it  was  carried  out.  All  the  prop- 
erty of  the  various  societies  was  seized,  the  churches 
and  convents  were  pulled  down,  and  the  bells  and 
other  materials  were  all  sold.  To  every  "religious 
man  "  there  were  given  forty  shillings  in  money  and 
a  gown — to  begin  the  world  with  I  To  some  of  them 
a  small  pension  was  assigned,  and  leave  was  given  to 
enter  another  house,  until  the  time  for  that  should 
come.  On  the  whole,  it  seems  to  have  been  right 
that  these  religious  houses,  or  most  of  them,  should 
be  dissolved:  the  treatment  of  the  inmates  was  unjust 
and  barbarous. 

It  is  not  surprising  that  a  widespread  discontent 
arose.  Those  who  were  shocked  by  the  desecration 
of  the  sacred  places,  many  of  them  raised  by  the  an- 
cestors of  great  families  still  of  influence  in  the  King- 
dom, the  poor  who  had  always  found  food  and  shelter 
in  the  religious  houses,  and  the  travelers  who  had 


InsiirrecLion.  95 


there  met  with  liospitality  on  their  journey,  were 
alike  aggrieved.  The  King  and  Cromwell  did  their 
best  to  appease  the  discontent  by  publishing  accounts, 
undoubtedly  exaggerated,  of  the  bad  condition  of 
these  houses,  and  by  selling  the  lands  of  the  Monas- 
teries at  low  prices  to  the  landed  gentry  of  the  differ- 
ent localities ;  but,  in  spite  of  this,  great  discontent 
arose.  A  rising  took  place  in  Lincolnshire  in  October 
(1536),  about  twenty  thousand  taking  part  in  it,  and 
complaining  among  other  things  of  the  suppression 
of  so  many  religious  houses.  By  conciliatory  meas- 
ures this  rising  was  suppressed.  But  a  more  serious 
insurrection,  known  as  the  Pilgrimage  of  Grace,  took 
place  soon  afterwards  in  Yorkshire.  The  insurgents 
were  led  by  Robert  Aske,  bore  a  banner  embroidered 
with  the  five  wounds  of  Christ,  and  were  the  repre- 
sentatives of  a  papal  reaction,  partly  the  result  of  the 
prevalent  discontent,  partly  stirred  up  by  the  scat- 
tered monks.  Among  other  things  they  demanded 
the  restoration  of  the  religious  houses,  the  depriva- 
tion of  the  reforming  bishops,  the  extirpation  of 
heresy,  and  the  restoration,  in  some  form,  of  the 
papal  authority.  The  King  was  so  seriously  alarmed 
that  it  is  said,  he  had  thoughts  of  entering  into  com- 
munication with  the  Pope  with  the  view  of  effecting 
a  reconciliation.  The  insurgents  were  so  numerous 
that  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  sent  against  them,  did  not 
venture  to  attack  tliem ;  and  the  King,  taking  a 
course  similar  to  that  adopted  with  the  Lincolnshire 
rebels,  proclaimed  a  general  pardon,  and  promised  to 
summon  a  parliament  for  the  redress  of  grievances. 
The  consequences  were  serious  to  those  who  had  been 


96  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

instrumental  in  stirring  up  tlie  insurrection.  Twelve 
abbots  were  hanged,  drawn,  and  quartered  for  par- 
ticipation in  it. 

In  the  following  year  (1537)  there  was  a  second 
visitation,  and  this  time  of  the  larger  houses  whicli 
liad  been  passed  over  before.  The  scope  of  the  in- 
quiry was  extended.  The  visitors  were  now  to  see 
that  the  treasures  of  the  houses  were  neither  hidden 
nor  made  away  with.  Moreover  they  were  to  ascer- 
tain their  affection  to  the  King  and  the  supremacy, 
and  to  discover  what  cheats  and  impostures  there 
were  in  their  images,  relics,  or  other  "  miraculous  " 
things,  for  which  people  had  been  induced  to  come 
to  their  houses  on  pilgrimages  or  had  brought  them 
great  presents;  also  to  find  out  whether  any  had 
taken  part  in  the  late  commotions. 

The  Act  of  Dissolution  had  given  to  the  King  all 
the  religious  houses  that  might  voluntarily  surrender 
to  him  within  a  year;  and  so  many  had  dissolved 
that  by  the  end  of  1538  very  few  of  them  were  left. 
The  Abbots  of  the  greater  houses  had  made  little 
opposition  in  the  House  of  Lords  to  the  sacrifice  of 
the  smaller  houses,  and  now  their  own  turn  had 
come.  Different  means  were  employed  to  bring 
about  their  surrender.  Some  had  been  implicated 
in  the  insurrections,  and  the  terrible  charge  of  trea- 
son hung  over  them.  Some  had  permitted  great  dis- 
orders among  the  brethren,  or  had  been  guilty  of  the 
like  themselves ;  and  so  were  glad  to  escape  with  a 
life  pension.  Some  were  inclined  to  the  Reforma- 
tion and  ready  to  break  with  the  old  order.  Sin- 
cerely or  otherwise,  some  accused  themselves  of  great 


Destruction  of  Superstitions.  97 

crimes,  confessing  that  "  they  had  neglected  the  wor- 
ship of  God,  and  had  lived  in  idleness,  gluttony,  and 
sensuality." 

ft/ 

Among  the  accompaniments  of  the  dissolution  of 
the  religious  houses  came  tlie  destruction  of  images 
and  relics  which  had  been  used  for  superstitious  pur- 
poses. Dr.  London  reported  from  Reading  that  the 
chief  relics  of  idolatry  in  the  nation  were  there, 
namely,  an  angel  with  one  wing  that  brought  over 
the  spear's  head  tliat  pierced  our  Saviour's  side,  and 
many  other  relics  an  inventory  of  which  would  fill 
four  sheets  of  paper.  Hugh  Cook,  the  Abbot  of 
Heading,  was  convicted  of  having  sent  some  of  the 
plate  of  the  Abbey  to  the  rebels  in  the  North,  was 
found  guilty  of  treason,  and  was  put  to  death. 

It  may  be  of  interest  to  mention  here  some  of  the 
relics  and  images  which  were  exposed,  especially  of 
those  supposed  to  possess  miraculous  powers.  There 
was  a  figure  of  the  Saviour  on  the  rood  at  Boxley,  in 
Kent,  which  moved  its  head  and  eyes.  This  rood  was 
brought  to  London  and  exhibited  to  the  populace, 
where  the  Bishop  of  Rochester  showed  that  the 
movements  were  caused  by  the  pulling  of  wires.  At 
Hales,  in  Worcestershire,  a  phial  was  shown  which 
was  supposed  to  contain  the  blood  of  our  Lord ;  but 
it  was  discovered  that  the  contents  were  merely 
colored  gum. 

Among  the  monuments  of  idolatry  destroyed  at 

tliis  time  the  principal  was  the  shrine  of  St.  Thomas 

of  Canterbury,  who  was  the  favorite  English  saint  in 

the   Middle   Ages,   as   is   evinced   by   the  amounts 

offered  at  the  three  greatest  altars  in  Canterbury 
G 


98  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Cathedral  in  one  year.  At  the  High  Altar,  the 
Altar  of  Christ,  £3  2s.  6c?. ;  at  that  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin,  £63  68.  Qd. ;  and  at  that  of  St.  Thomas  X832 
12s.  3c?.  In  other  years  the  difference  was  still 
greater,  and  to  the  advantage  of  St.  Thomas.  King 
Henry  had  two  reasons  for  detesting  tLe  cult  of  St. 
Thomas.  He  was  the  representative  of  the  success- 
ful opposition  of  the  hierarchy  to  the  Sovereign, 
and  the  worship  of  his  shrine  diverted  a  large  amount 
of  treasure  to  doing  honor  to  his  memory.  The 
shrine  was  therefore  ordered  to  be  broken  in  pieces 
and  carried  away.  The  gold  in  and  about  the  shrine 
filled  two  chests  so  heavy  that  they  required  eight 
strong  men  to  carry  them  out  of  the  Church.  The 
martyr's  bones  were  burned  or  mingled  with  those  of 
others  (August  19,  1538).  His  name  was  struck  out 
of  the  calendar,  and  the  office  for  his  festival  from  tho 
Breviary.  When  the  Pope  heard  of  tliis  outrage,  he 
could  no  longer  withhold  the  Bull  of  excommunica- 
tion which  he  had  drawn  up  against  Heary  about 
three  years  before.  He  now  declared  the  King  of 
England  excommunicated  and  deposed. 

The  Act  of  Dissolution  of  1536  having  provided 
only  for  the  suppression  of  the  smaller  houses, 
another  was  passed  in  the  Spring  of  1539,  sanction- 
ing and  regulating  the  transfer  of  those  which  had 
taken  place.  Among  the  last  and  saddest  of  the 
acts  of  spoliation  was  the  dissolution  of  the  Abbey 
of  Glastonbury  and  the  judicial  murder  of  its  head, 
Robert  Whyting.  According  to  a  contemporary 
letter,  he  was  "  arraigned  and  next  day  put  to  exe- 
cution for  robbing  of  Glastonbury  Church."    As  a 


Whyting  of  Olastonhury.  99 

matter  of  fact,  there  was  no  serious  charge  against 
him  or  his  community.  Their  only  sin  was  their 
wealth,  and  there  was  no  proof  that  they  spent  it 
unlawfully  or  mischievously.  But  Henry  wanted 
their  money  and  regarded  them  as  on  the  side  of  the 
Pope,  and  resolved  on  their  destruction.  Whyting 
did  his  best  to  preserve  the  property  of  his  Abbey 
and  hid  away  his  money  and  jewels.  For  this  he 
was  hanged  and  quartered  on  Tor  Hill  (1539).  It 
is  not  a  glorious  page  in  the  history  of  the  English 
Keformation.    And  now  we  must  go  back  a  little. 


{{ 


JAN  16   1?0D 


,->/  v 


'*^**'"^'^^^'7r^*rvt4«»**^**^ 


CHAPTER  XI. 

EEFORMATION  AND  BEACTION. 

|T  is  impossible  to  read  carefully  the  history 
of  the  English  Reformation  without  be- 
ing impressed  by  the  numerous  apparent 
contradictions  and  inconsistencies  which 
it  discloses.  One  of  the  most  striking  phenomena  is 
the  apparent  servility  of  the  English  people  to  their 
sovereigns  during  this  period.  That  a  people  so 
proud,  so  independent,  so  ready  to  resist  any  en- 
croachment on  their  liberties,  should  have  been 
ready  to  change  backwards  and  forwards,  to  adopt  re- 
forms and  to  reject  them  or  undo  them  at  the  will  of 
the  Sovereign  may  seem  almost  incredible. 

We  are  here  dealing  with  a  subject  of  great  com- 
plexity, and  a  few  general  remarks  may  be  allowed 
in  this  place,  leaving  the  treatment  of  particular  in- 
cidents to  the  places  to  which  they  belong.  In  the 
first  place,  the  destruction  of  the  nobility  during  the 
Wars  of  the  Roses  left  the  sovereign  without  con- 
trol, the  middle  class  having  not  yet  risen  to  impor- 
tance. Further,  it  must  not  be  assumed  that  the 
people  and  the  sovereign  were  generally  of  different 
minds.  Those  Tudor  sovereigns,  masterly  and  over- 
bearing as  they  were,  yet  understood  their  people 
and  often  represented  them  when  they  seemed  to 
control  them.  Moreover,  for  a  long  time,  the  re- 
forming and  conservative  tendencies  seem  to  have 

100 


Jurisdiclion  and  Doctrine.  101 


been  so  evenly  balanced  that  oscillations  of  the  pub- 
lic mind  in  either  direction  might  reasonably  be  ex- 
pected. 

In  regard  to  Henry's  reforming  action,  it  must  be 
clearly  kept  in  mind  that  he  had  no  misgivings  at 
all  on  the  subject  of  limiting  the  prerogatives  of  the 
papal  see.  At  first,  he  simply  wanted  to  do  what 
his  predecessor's  had  done.  He  would  be  supreme 
over  all  caus'js  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil,  and 
would  suffer  no  appeals  to  be  made  to  Rome  without 
his  leave.  When  he  could  not  have  his  own  way  in 
the  matter  of  the  divorce,  he  cut  the  connection  with 
Rome  altogether.  Perhaps  he  might  not  have  gone 
so  far,  if  the  Pope  had  not  published  his  Bull  of  ex- 
communication. 

In  regard,  however,  to  the  reformation  of  doc- 
trine, Henry  was  evidently  of  quite  another  mind. 
He  was  a  friend  of  the  new  learning,  but  he  had  no 
mind  for  the  principles  of  the  German  or  the  Swiss 
Reformation.  When  he  was  getting  possession  of  the 
funds  of  the  religious  houses,  he  showed  a  leaning 
to  those  principles  which  condemned  the  abuses  of 
which  he  took  advantage.  It  seems  certain  too,  that 
he  felt  the  influence  of  Queen  Anne  and  of  Crom- 
well ;  but  when  he  began  to  grow  weary  of  Anne, 
and  Cromwell's  authority  was  on  the  wane,  he  re- 
coiled from  the  reforms  whicn  he  had  begun  to  sanc- 
tion, and  became  reactionary.  It  is  possible,  more- 
over, that  the  Pilgrimage  of  Grace  may  have  brought 
home  to  him  the  conviction  that  there  was  more 
vitality  in  the  traditional  faith  than  he  had  imag- 
ined. 


102  The  Anglican  Ueformation. 

In  the  same  year  in  whicli  the  minor  Monasteries 
were  dissolved  (1536)  Queen  Catharine  died,  and 
soon  afterwards  came  the  divorcs  and  the  execution 
of  Queen  Anne.  Henrj  partly  had  grown  weary  of 
her,  partly  was  disappointed  by  her  having  no  son  : 
one  was  born  dead  in  this  year.  Besides,  he  had 
fallen  in  love  with  Jane  Seymour.  It  was  a  shame- 
ful business,  and  does  not  directly  concern  us  here. 
The  charges  against  the  unfortunate  woman  were 
probably  all  false,  none  of  them  could  be  said  to  be 
proved,  some  of  them  were  utterly  incredible.  It  is 
one  of  the  dark  spots  on  the  history  of  Cranmer  that 
lie  proclaimed  the  divorce  of  Anne.  The  King's 
conduct  was  as  indecent  as  it  was  cruel  and  unjust: 
the  day  after  Anne's  head  fell  on  Tower  Green,  he 
married  Jane  Seymour  (May  20, 1636).  He  next  ob- 
tained an  Act  of  Parliament,  securing  the  succession 
of  the  offspring  of  Jane,  and  declaring  both  Mary 
and  Elizabeth  illegitimate. 

Some  attempt  at  Reformation  in  doctrine  was 
made  by  the  Convocation  of  1536.  Latimer,  preach- 
ing before  this  august  body,  brought  some  grave  ac- 
cusations agaiiist  the  Clergy,  referring  to  the  corrup- 
tion of  the  Cliuruh  courts,  the  superstitious  use  of 
images  and  pilgrimages,  the  sale  of  masses  and  the 
like.  But  the  Clergy  were  not  prepared  to  go  all 
lengths  with  the  reformers.  Acknowledging  the 
King's  supremacy,  they  yet  complained  that  great 
license  had  crept  into  the  expressions  used  about  the 
Church  and  the  Sacraments.  They  also  complained 
that  books  which  had  been  condemned  by  Convoca- 
tion had  not  been  prohibited  by  the  bishops.     The 


The  Ten  Articles,  103 


reply,  on  the  part  of  the  bishops  to  this  memorial, 
was  the  document  known  as  the  Ten  Articles,  which 
was  intended,  on  the  one  hand,  to  repress  the  irrever- 
ence of  some  of  tlie  reformers,  and,  on  the  other,  to 
cast  some  of  the  mediaeval  practices  into  the  shade. 
These  articles  were  presented  to  Convocation  by 
Bishop  Fox  of  Hereford,  July  11,  and.  accepted  by 
both  houses.  They  were  then  published  under  the 
title  of  "Articles  devised  by  the  King's  Highness* 
majesty  to  establish  Christian  quietness  and  unity 
among  us,  and  to  avoid  contentious  opinions :  which 
articles  be  also  approved  by  the  consent  and  deter- 
mination of  the  whole  clergy  of  this  realri."  These 
articles,  while  showing  a  disposition  to  drop  some  of 
the  traditional  beliefs  and  observances,  were  yefc  not 
of  a  revolutionary  character.  They  declare  that  the 
Christian  faith  is  contained  in  the  Bible  and  the 
three  Creeds,  interpreted  according  to  the  Doctors 
of  the  Church  and  the  "four  holy  Councils."  Of 
the  seven  sacraments,  three  only  are  explained. 
Baptism,  Penance  and  the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar. 
Nothing  is  said  of  the  other  four.  Baptism  is  de- 
clared to  be  the  means  of  deliverance  from  original 
sin  and  of  obtaining  the  Holy  Spirit.  Penance, 
embracing  contrition,  confession,  and  amendment,  is 
declared  to  be  necessary  for  all  who  have  fallen  into 
deadly  sin  after  baptism.  As  regards  the  Eucharist, 
it  is  said  that  under  the  form  and  figure  of  bread  and 
wine  is  "verily,  substantially,  and  really  contained 
and  comprehended  the  very  self-same  body  and  blood 
of  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  which  was  born  of  the 
Virgin  Mary,  and  suffered  upon  the  Cross  for  our 


104  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

redemption."  The  ground  of  justification  is  declared 
to  be  the  merits  of  the  passion  of  Christ,  and  its  at- 
tainment through  contrition  and  faith  joined  with 
charity.  Images  are  valuable,  if  rightly  used. 
Saints  are  to  be  honored,  but  not  as  God.  Purga- 
tory is  partly  allowed,  so  far  as  prayers  for  the  dead 
are  concerned ;  but  any  belief  in  the  Pope's  power 
to  abridge  the  periou  of  trial  is  treated  as  a  super- 
stition. 

In  these  articles  we  see  the  presence  of  tendencies 
which  are  apparent  throughout  the  whole  history  of 
the  English  Reformation ;  and  in  this  regard  their 
contents  are  of  considerable  importance.  It  has 
been  sometimes  charged  against  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land that  she  takes  what  is  called  the  Via  Media, 
meaning  by  this  that  she  makes  a  compromise  be- 
tween the  i^arty  who  clung  to  the  traditional  beliefs 
and  those  who  advocated  revolution.  Even  if  this 
were  the  case,  probability  would  be  on  her  side. 
But  it  may  be  said  with  some  confidence  that  liistory 
will  not  bear  out  this  theory.  The  English  reform- 
ers, taken  as  a  whole,  were  neither  eclectics  nor  were 
they  mediators  between  extremes.  They  acted  and 
they  intended  to  act  upon  the  principle  laid  down  in 
the  Ten  Articles,  that  the  faith  of  the  Church  must 
be  determined  and  tested  first  by  the  Scriptures  and 
the  Creeds,  then  by  the  Fathers  and  the  early  Coun- 
cils of  the  Church.  Here  is  a  clear  principle  upon 
which  the  Church  of  England  professes  to  base  her 
action,  and  she  has  never  departed  from  it.  At  dif- 
ferent times  men  may  have  taken  somewhat  difi*erent 
views  as  to  what  was  to  be  regarded  as  primitive  and 


Conflict.  105 

permanent  in  the  Creed  of  tlie  Church;  and  evi- 
dencas  of  these  differences  are  found  in  her  history 
and  in  her  formuhiries ;  but  this  is  a  totally  different 
matter  from  any  theory  of  compromise.  Not  only 
is  this  which  may  be  called  the  Anglican  principle 
announced  in  the  Ten  Articles,  it  is  also  practically 
recognized  and  illustrated  in  their  contents. 

The  last  session  of  the  Convocation  by  which  the 
Ten  Articles  were  sanctioned  was  held  in  July, 
1536;  and  in  October  the  insurrection  already  men- 
tioned broke  out  in  Lincolnshire.  At  the  same  time 
an  irregular  Convocation  assembled  at  York,  in 
evident  opposition  to  the  recent  doings  of  the  Con- 
vocation of  Canterbury.  They  condemned  the 
preaching  against  purgatory,  worshipping  of  images 
and  saints,  pilgrimages  and  the  like.  They  also  de- 
clared that  no  acts  of  parliament  could  convey  to 
the  King  the  supreme  headship  of  the  Church  or  the 
right  to  exercise  any  spiritual  jurisdiction  in  the 
same.  This  was  bad  enough,  but  they  further  pro- 
ceeded to  declare  that  lands  given  to  God  could  not 
be  taken  away,  and  that  the  Pope  was  Head  of  the 
Church,  and  that  dispensations  and  indulgences 
given  by  him  were  good  and  valid.  The  King  met 
these  mutinous  protests  in  two  ways.  Ultimately 
they  cost  some  of  their  promoters  their  heads,  as 
they  were  regarded  as  treasonous ;  but  immediately 
he  took  pains,  through  the  bishops,  to  point  out  that 
the  Ten  Articles  in  no  degree  departed  from  the 
Catholic  faith,  and  that  all  "honest  ceremonies  of 
the  Church  "  were  encouraged  and  not  condemned. 

In  order  to  give  further  effect  to  the  work  of  refor- 


106  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

mation  a  meeting  of  the  bishops  of  both  provinces 
was  held  early  in  1537,  at  which  a  committee  was  ap- 
pointed to  draw  up  a  book  of  religious  instruction. 
As  a  consequence  there  appeared  the  work  entitled 
tlie  "  Institution  of  a  Christian  man  "  (May,  1537), 
known  as  the  "Bishops'  Book,"  with  the  approval  of 
the  King,  This  book  contains  an  exposition  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  the  Ten  Commandments,  and  the 
Lord's  Prayer  :  also  of  the  *'  Seven  Sacraments ;  '* 
and  of  Justification  and  Purgatory.  The  Ten 
Articles  are  embodied  in  the  book ;  and  the  three 
sacraments  there  described  are  declared  to  be  of 
greater  dignity  and  necessity  than  the  others. 

In  this  year  the  translation  of  the  Scriptures 
known  as  Matthew's  Bible  (the  pseudonym  of  John 
llogers)  was  printed  on  the  Continent.  It  had  been 
made  up  from  the  portions  left  by  Tyndale,  and,  as 
regards  the  remaining  parts,  from  Coverdale's  version, 
the  publication  of  which  had  been  sanctioned  by  the 
King  in  the  previous  year.  The  notes  showed  a 
strong  leaning  to  the  principles  of  the  Reformation. 
The  book  was  licenced  by  the  King  in  much  the 
same  way  in  which  the  "  Institution "  had  been 
sanctioned,  without  his  knowing  much  about  its 
contents.  It  gave  great  satisfaction  to  Cranmer  and 
the  reformers.  A  revision  of  this  translation  was 
printed  in  England  and  published  in  1539,  and  was 
known  as  the  "Great  Bible." 

Preparations  were  made  for  rendering  the  trans- 
lation practically  useful  by  the  issuing  of  royal  in- 
junctions that  a  large  copy  of  the  whole  Bible  should 
be  set  up  in   some  convenient  place  within  each 


The  Great  Bible,  107 


Church,  where  the  parishioners  might  most  com- 
modiously  resort  to  tlie  same  and  read  it.  At  the 
same  time  the  clergy  were  admonished  not  to  dis- 
courage the  reading  of  the  Scriptures,  but  that  they 
should  "  expressly  provoke,  stir,  and  exhort  every 
person  to  read  the  same  as  that  which  is  the  very 
lively  word  of  God,  that  every  Christian  man  is 
bound  to  embrace,  believe,  and  follow,  if  he  look  to 
be  saved." 

Among  these  injunctions  were  instructions  to  the 
clergy  to  instruct  the  people  in  the  knowledge  of  the 
formularies,  when  they  came  to  confession  in  Lent,  to 
preach  a  sermon  once  a  quarter,  containing  the  pure 
Gospel  and  warning  them  not  to  trust  in  pilgrimages, 
or  any  other  superstitious  usages,  and  forbidding  the 
use  of  lights  in  the  Church  except  the  light  by  the 
rood  loft,  the  light  before  the  Sacrament,  and  the 
light  about  the  sepulchre  in  Holy  Week  (1538). 

Henry  VIH.,  under  the  influence  of  Cranmer  and 
Cromwell,  had  gone  as  far  in  the  way  of  reformation 
as  he  was  prepared  to  go.  It  is  indeed  likely  that 
he  allowed  them  to  go  so  far  because  he  had  not 
very  carefully  examined  the  documents  which  they 
had  issued.  But  now  an  attempt  was  made  to  effect 
a  confessional  union  between  Anglicans  and  the 
German  Lutherans,  although  the  King  had  declared 
his  disapproval  of  the  confession  of  Augsburg. 
Moreover  a  good  deal  of  profane  ridicule  had  been 
cast  by  members  of  the  reforming  party  on  some  of 
the  old  customs  which  had  not  been  condemned  by 
authority.  Henry  had  wanted  to  stand  well  with 
the   foreign  reformers  on  account  of  his  relations 


108  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

with  the  Emperor  Charles,  his  first  wife's  nephew ; 
and  tlierefore  he  had  made  concessions  which  were 
certainly  not  to  his  own  mind.  But  now  these 
negotiations  were  broken  off,  and  a  system  of  per- 
secution began,  directed  against  those  who  were  de- 
parting from  the  traditional  beliefs. 

One  example  of  the  change  of  attitude  was  given 
in  a  proclamation,  issued  in  November,  1538,  for- 
bidding any  priests  who  had  married  to  minister  any 
sacrament  or  other  ministry  mystical,  or  to  hold  any 
office  or  preferment,  and  expelling  them  from  the 
same  and  regarding  them  as  lay  persons.  Still  worse 
was  the  case  of  one  Nicholson,  or  Lambert,  as  he  had 
called  himself,  who  had  adopted  Zwinglian  views  of 
the  Sacrament  of  the  altar.  Being  brought  before 
Cranmer,  who  then  held  Lutheran  views,  Lambert, 
when  condemned  by  the  Archbishop,  imprudently 
appealed  to  the  Xing,  who  was  never  unwilling  to 
display  his  considerable  theological  learning.  Henry 
told  the  accused  that  the  words  of  Christ,  "  This  is 
my  body,"  settled  the  question,  and  the  poor  man 
was  condemned  to  the  stake.  About  the  same  time 
the  King  gave  out  that  he  did  not  wish  the  abolition 
of  Church  ceremonies,  and  exhorted  to  the  ob- 
servance of  those  of  "  holy  bread,  holy  water,  pro- 
cessions, kneeling  and  creeping  on  Good  Friday  to 
the  cross,  and  on  Easter  Day  setting  up  of  lights  be- 
fore the  Corpus  Christi,"  and  the  like.  It  was 
evident  that  reaction  had  set  in. 

But  the  high-water  mark  of  reaction  was  reached 
by  the  passing  of  the  Statute  of  the  Six  Articles  by 
both  houses  of  Parliament,  at  the  request  of  the 


The  Six  Articles.  109 


King.  Henry  had  been  irritated  by  some  of  the 
criticisms,  by  Lutheran  divines  in  England,  of  things 
still  tolerated  in  the  Church  of  England,  which  they 
regarded  as  abuses.  Accordingly  he  brought  a  series 
of  questions  before  the  House  of  Lords  with  reference 
to  certain  matters  of  dispute  ;  as  to  Transubstantia- 
tion,  communion  in  both  kinds,  vows  of  chastity, 
private  masses,  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy,  and 
auricular  confession.  Cranmer  represented  the  re- 
forming bishops,  or  men  of  "the  new  learning." 
Those  of  the  "  old  learning "  were  represented  by 
Lee  of  York.  Each  party  drafted  a  bill  on  the  sub- 
ject, but  neither  was  accepted.  That  of  the  King 
was  ultimately  adopted.  When  the  six  points  were 
submitted  to  Convocation  (June  2,  1639),  they  were 
accepted,  Bishops  Latimer  and  Shaxton,  and  Doctors 
Crome  and  Tailour  dissenting.  When  brought  into 
the  Lords  (June  7)  the  King  wished  Cranmer  to 
give  his  support  or  absent  himself  from  the  house. 
He  would  not  give  his  approval,  but  he  desisted 
from  opposition,  seeing  its  uselessness. 

The  Six  Articles  agreed  upon  were  to  the  following 
effect :  (1)  That  there  was  a  real  presence  of  "  the 
natural  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ "  in  the  Eucharist ; 
(2)  That  communion  in  one  kind  was  sufficient ;  (3) 
That  the  clergy  may  not  marry  ;  (4)  That  vows  of 
chastity  are  of  perpetual  obligations;  (5)  That 
private  masses  were  lawful  and  commendable;  (6) 
That  auricular  confession  is  necessary.  Whoever 
opposed  the  first  article  was  to  be  burned.  Who- 
ever rejected  the  other  five  was,  for  the  first  offence, 
to  suffer  loss  of  goods  and  imprisonment,  and  for  the 


110  The  Anglican  Refonnation. 

second,  to  be  hanged.  Marriages  of  priests  and  of 
those  who  had  vowed  chastity  were  to  be  dissolved. 
Cranmer,  who  was  married,  was  required  to  send 
away  his  wife.  If  they  married  again,  they  were  to 
be  hanged.  The  act  was  known  as  the  "  Whip  with 
six  strings." 

The  very  badness  of  the  act  was  probably  the  rea- 
son of  its  comparative  ineffectiveness.  As  many  as 
five  hundred  were  cast  into  prison,  and  nearly  thirty 
may  have  been  put  to  death.  "  Tliis  severe  and  bar- 
barous statute,"  as  the  Roman  Catholic  Lingard  calls 
it,  had  this  terrible  new  feature  that  it  left  no  place 
for  repentance.  It  declared :  "  If  any  person  write, 
preach,  or  dispute  against  the  first  article,  he  shall 
not  be  allowed  to  abjure,  but  shall  suffer  death  as  a 
heretic,  and  forfeit  his  goods  and  chattels  to  the 
King.  Latimer  of  Worcester  and  Shaxton  of  Salis- 
bury resigned  their  sees;  but  the  latter  recanted 
and  was  restored.  About  this  time  Bonner  was 
raised  to  the  episcopate,  first  as  Bishop  of  Hereford, 
and  afterwards  of  London,  being  like  Gardiner  of 
the  party  of  the  old  learning  in  doctrine,  yet  a 
strenuous  maintainer  of  the  royal  supremacy. 

Reference  must  here  be  made  to  some  matters  per- 
sonally concerning  the  King,  since  they  cannot  easily 
be  separated  from  the  story  of  the  Reformation. 
The  principal  incident  of  this  period,  and  one  of  the 
most  shameful,  is  what  must  be  called  the  cruel 
murder  of  Cromwell,  Earl  of  Essex.  He  was  the 
victim  of  the  King's  passions  and  his  ingratitude. 
Cranmer  did  not  exaggerate,  when,  in  pleading  for 
him,  he  declared  that  "  No  King  of  England  ever 


Fall  of  Cromwell.  Ill 

had  such  a  servant."  He  is  a  man  of  whose  origin 
little  is  known,  but  of  whose  abilities  there  can  be 
no  question.  He  was  the  chief  framer  of  the  royal 
policy  in  asserting  the  supremacy  and  carrying 
through  the  Reformation.  His  chief  fault  was  his 
having  promoted  Henry's  marriage  with  Anne  of 
Cleves,  whom  the  King,  in  the  most  disgraceful 
manner,  got  divorced.  He  was  also  detested  by 
many  of  the  nobility,  particularly  by  the  Duke  of 
Norfolk,  with  whose  daughter  Henry  had  fallen  in 
love.  As  Anne  Boleyn  brought  about  the  fall  of 
Henry's  faithful  servant,  Cardinal  Wolsey,  so  Cath- 
arine Howard  helped  to  bring  Thomas  Cromwell  to 
the  block.  On  the  same  day  that  his  head  fell,  the 
King  married  Catharine  (July  28,  1540).  Her  tri- 
umph was  short-lived.  She  was  proved  guilty  of  in- 
continency  before  her  marriage,  and  beheaded  on 
Tower  Green. 

Respecting  the  great  minister  of  Henry  VHT.  wide 
differences  of  opinion  will  always  prevail.  We  can 
quote  the  words  of  Burnet  without  forgetting  that 
another  painter  has  introduced  some  darker  shadows 
into  the  portrait:  "Thus  fell  that  great  minister, 
that  was  raised  merely  upon  the  strength  of  his 
natural  parts.  For,  as  his  extraction  was  mean,  so 
his  education  was  low :  all  the  learning  he  had  was, 
that  he  had  got  tlie  New  Testament  in  Latin  by 
heart.  His  great  wisdom  and  dexterity  in  business 
raised  him  up  through  several  steps,  till  he  was  be- 
come as  great  as  a  subject  could  be.  He  carried  his 
greatness  with  wonderful  temper  and  moderation ; 
and  fell  under  the  weight  of  popular  odium  rather 


112  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

than  guilt.  The  disorders  in  the  suppression  of  ab- 
beys were  generally  charged  on  him ;  yet  when  he 
fell,  no  bribery  nor  cheating  of  the  King,  could  be 
fastened  on  him  ;  though  such  things  come  out  in 
swarms  on  a  disgraced  favorite,  when  there  is  any 
ground  for  them." 

Just  before  the  execution  of  Cromwell  the  King, 
on  Cranmer's  representation  of  the  severity  of  the 
punishments  for  clerical  marriages,  sanctioned  the 
passing  of  a  statute  (July  20)  reducing  the  punish- 
ment of  death  to  the  forfeiture  of  benefice  and  goods. 
The  reactionary  party,  however,  still  had  the  upper 
hand.  Bills  of  attainder  were  brought  into  parlia- 
ment against  three  Lutherans,  and  along  with  them 
a  number  of  others,  some  for  denying  the  supremacy, 
some  for  heresies  unmentioned,  were  condemned  to 
death.  Henry  seemed  now  to  kill  without  misgiving 
or  reluctance.  On  May  17,  1541,  the  Countess  of 
Salisbury  was  beheaded  for  no  other  fault  than  that 
she  was  the  mother  of  Cardinal  Pole,  who  had 
written  against  the  divorce  of  Queen  Catharine. 
There  was  an  appearance  of  impartiality  in  some  of 
these  slaughters — the  impugners  of  Transubstantia- 
tion  and  those  who  questioned  the  supremacy  being 
marched  to  the  stake  in  pairs.  But  an  act  passed  in 
January,  1543,  was  clearly  intended  to  repress  the  re- 
forming spirit.  This  act,  after  pointing  out  the  evils 
arising  from  a  perversion  of  the  Scriptures,  promises 
that  a  form  of  orthodox  doctrine  shall  be  set  forth, 
forbids  all  books  contrary  to  the  Six  Articles,  also 
the  reading  of  the  Bible  to  all  under  the  degree  of 
gentlemen  or  gentlewomen.    In  some  points  this  act 


Attach  on  Cranmer,  113 

modified  the  Six  Article  Statute,  exempting  tlie  laity 
from  capital  punishment  for  heresy,  and  permitting 
the  accused  to  call  witnesses.  But  the  King  had 
power  to  set  aside  any  part  of  this  law,  so  that  the 
gain  was  very  uncertain. 

The  boldness  of  the  reactionary  party  may  be 
judged  from  an  attempt  which  tliey  made  to  inflame 
the  King  against  Archbishop  Cranmer.  The  Arch- 
bishop was  of  a  yielding  disposition  generally,  and 
more  especially  to  the  King,  hardly  ever  thinking  of 
crossing  his  will.  Nevertheless  he  had  the  interests 
of  the  Reformation  at  heart  and  did  his  best  to  de- 
fend and  protect  those  who  were  charged  with  hold- 
ing the  reformed  doctrines.  Some  of  the  clergy  of 
his  own  cathedral  wrote  to  the  King  accusing  their 
Archbishop  of  encouraging  heresy  in  his  diocese. 
The  King  handed  the  letters  over  to  Cranmer.  A 
member  of  the  House  o?  Commons  accused  him  of 
preaching  heresy  in  regard  to  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar.  He  found  no  encouragement,  however,  from 
the  King,  but  only  a  demand  that  he  should  apolo- 
gize to  the  Archbishop  for  his  offence.  But  a  more 
serious  attack  was  made  upon  him  and  one  of  special 
interest  because  it  gave  occasion  for  one  of  the  few 
scenes  in  the  life  of  Henry  VIH.  which  the  impartial 
reader  can  contemplate  with  satisfaction,  a  scene  de- 
scribed by  the  historian  and  adorned  b}'  the  genius 
of  Shakespeare,  As  Cranmer  is  the  most  prominent 
figure  in  the  early  history  of  the  Reformation,  it  is 
worth  while  to  dwell  for  a  moment  upon  this  scene. 

It  was  clear  to  the  reactionary  party  that  they 
could  never  have  everything  as  they  wished  whilst 
H 


114  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Cranmer  retained  the  confidence  of  the  King ;  and 
so  they  resolved,  if  possible,  to  compass  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  Archbishop,  and,  with  him,  of  Queen 
Catharine  Parr,  who  also  favored  the  reformed  prin- 
ciples. They  therefore  represented  to  the  King  that 
there  were  proofs  enough  against  Cranmer ;  but 
that  none  would  venture  to  bring  them  forward  so 
long  as  they  thought  he  was  in  favor  with  the  King. 
If,  however,  he  were  sent  to  the  Tower,  then  there 
would  be  no  difficulty  about  the  matter.  The  King 
consented  to  his  being  summoned  before  the  Coun- 
cil, and  also  that  he  should  be  sent  to  the  Tower,  if 
they  should  see  cause  for  that.  His  enemies  now 
thought  him  as  good  as  ruined.  The  King,  however, 
sent  for  him  in  the  night  and  tc  Id  him  of  the  accusa- 
tions and  in  what  manner  he  had  received  them. 
Cranmer  thanked  him  for  the  warning,  acknowl- 
edged the  fairness  of  his  action,  and  said  he  asked 
for  nothing  but  to  be  allowed  to  answer.  The  King 
was  astonished  at  his  simplicity,  pointing  out  to 
him  that  if  he  were  once  sent  to  the  Tower,  there 
would  be  no  lack  of  witnesses  to  prove  anything. 
He  told  him,  therefore,  to  demand,  when  he  came 
before  the  council,  that  liis  accusers  might  be 
brought  face  to  face  with  him  before  he  was  sent  to 
the  Tower.  If  they  refused  this  request,  he  was  to 
appeal  to  the  King,  showing  the  roj'al  signet  as  his 
warrant.  The  King  gave  him  the  riiig  and  sent  him 
privately  home. 

Next  morning  Cranmer  was  summoned  before  the 
council.  He  went  at  once,  but  was  kept  waiting  for 
some    time   in   the   ante-chamber.     Dr.   Butts,   the 


Henry^s  Friendship  for  Cranmer.  1 16 

King's  physician,  went  and  told  the  King  what  a 
strange  thing  he  had  seen:  "the  Primate  of  all 
England  waiting  at  the  council  door  among  tlie  foot- 
men and  servants."  The  King  immediately  sent 
word  that  the  /  "chbishop  should  be  admitted,  which 
was  done.  He  was  then  informed  of  the  charges 
against  him,  to  the  effect  that  all  the  heresies  in 
England  came  from  him  and  his  chaplains.  To  all 
this  he  answered  as  the  King  had  directed.  But 
they  were  set  upon  carrying  out  their  plan  of  send- 
ing him  to  the  Tower.  Expressing  his  regret  at  be- 
ing so  used  by  those  with  whom  he  had  sat  so  long 
at  that  board,  he  said  that  it  had  become  necessary 
for  him  to  appeal  from  them  to  the  King,  at  the 
same  time  to  their  great  confusion  showing  them  the 
ring. 

When  they  appeared  before  the  King,  he  rebuked 
them  for  their  treatment  of  the  Archbishop.  He 
declared  **  by  the  faith  he  owed  to  God,"  that,  if  a 
Prince  could  be  indebted  to  his  subject,  he  was  to 
the  Archbishop,  and  that  **  he  took  him  to  be  the 
most  faithful  subject  that  he  had,  and  the  person  to 
whoiT)  he  was  the  most  beholden." 

The  Duke  of  Norfolk,  the  leader  of  the  opposite 
party  excused  himself  by  saying,  "they  meant  no 
harm  to  the  Archbishop,  but  only  to  vindicate  his 
innocency  by  such  a  trial,  which  would  have  freed 
him  from  the  aspersions  that  were  cast  upon  him." 
To  this  the  King  made  answer,  "  that  he  would  not 
suffer  men  that  were  so  dear  to  him  to  be  handled 
in  that  fashion.  He  knew  the  factions  that  were 
among  them,  and  the  malice  that  some  of  them  bore 


116  Tlie  Anylican  lieformation. 

to  others,  which  he  would  either  extinguish  or  pun- 
ish very  speedily."  Burnet  places  this  incident  in 
the  year  1546,  as  having  liappened  after  the  death 
of  the  Duke  in  August,  1545.  As,  however.  Dr. 
Butts  died  in  Novemher  of  that  year,  it  must  he 
placed  between  August  and  November.  Burnet 
says,  the  reconciliation  which  the  King  brought  about 
was  quite  sincere  on  Cranmer's  part,  "  though  the 
otlier  party  did  not  so  easily  lay  down  the  hatred  they 
bore  him."  * 

These  plotters  were  not  content  to  be  so  foiled, 
and  made  another  attempt,  this  time  directly  against 
the  Queen  who  in  various  ways  showed  favor  to  the 
party  of  reform.  So  long  as  the  King  was  satisfied 
with  her  in  other  respects,  he  paid  no  attention  to 
the  rumors  of  her  hearing  sermons  from  the  reform- 
ing teachers.  When,  however,  she  began  to  argue 
these  questions  with  the  King  himself,  he  became 
alarmed  and  communicated  his  sentiments  on  the 
subject  in  the  presence  of  Gardiner,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester; "and  he,"  says  Burnet,  " craftily  and  ma- 
liciously struck  in  with  the  King's  anger,  and  said  all 
that  he  could  devise  against  the  Queen,  to  drive  his 
resentments  higher;  and  took  in  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor with  the  design  to  assist  him." 

As  a  consequence  articles  were  drawn  up  against 
Queen  Catharine  and  signed  by  the  King.  But  the 
paper,  being  accidentally  dropped  by  the  Lord  Chan- 
cellor, came  into  the  Queen's  hands.  Though  much 
alarmed,  yet  by  the  advice  of  one  of  her  friends  she 

'  Bnrnet,  Eefoitnation,  Part  I.  Booli  III.   Shakespeare  places  the 
incident  a  good  deal  earlier,  for  dramatic  reasons. 


Queen  Catharine  Parr.  117 

went  to  see  the  King,  who  received  her  kindly  and 
began  a  conversation  on  the  subject  of  religion. 
Slie  was  too  wise,  however,  to  place  herself,  as  a 
controversialist,  on  a  level  with  her  husband.  Wo- 
men, she  said,  were  by  their  first  creation  made  sub- 
ject to  men,  and  therefore  should  learn  of  them ; 
"and  she  much  more  was  to  be  taught  by  his  Maj- 
esty, who  was  a  prince  of  sucli  excellent  learning 
and  wisdom."  "  Not  so,  by  St.  Mary,"  said  the 
King.  "  You  are  become  a  doctor  able  to  instruct  us, 
and  not  to  be  instructed  by  us."  She  assured  him 
that  "he  had  much  mistaken  the  freedom  she  had 
taken  with  him,  since  she  did  it  partly  to  engage 
him  in  discourse,  and  so  put  over  the  time  and  make 
him  forget  his  pain  ;  and  partly  to  receive  instruc- 
tions from  him,  by  which  she  had  profited  much." 
"  And  is  it  even  so  ?  "  said  the  King,  "  then  we  are 
friends  again."  So,  says  Burnet,  he  embraced  her 
with  great  affection,  and  sent  her  away  with  very 
tender  assurances  of  his  constant  love  to  her.  Next 
day  the  Lord  Chancellor  came  with  a  guard  to  con- 
duct her  to  the  Tower.  "But,"  says  Burnet,  "the 
King  stepped  aside  to  him ;  and  after  a  little  dis- 
course he  was  heard  to  call  him  knave,  fool,  and 
beast,  and  he  bade  him  get  out  of  his  sight.  .  ,  So 
this  design  miscarried;  which,  as  it  absolutely  dis- 
heartened the  papists,  so  it  did  totally  alienate  the 
King  from  them,  and  in  particular  from  the  Bishop 
of  Winchester,  whose  sight  he  could  never  after  this 
endure.  But  he  made  a  humble  submission  to  the 
King ;  which  though  it  preserved  him  from  further 
punishment,  yet  could  not  restore  him  to  the  King's 


118  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

favor."  Lingard  says  that  some  have  supposed  that 
the  whole  scheme  was  of  the  King's  contrivance,  to 
wean  his  wife  from  an  attachment  to  the  dangerous 
doctrines ;  but  there  does  not  seem  sufficient  reason 
for  this  suggestion. 

It  is  said  that  the  books  which  the  Queen  had 
studied  came  from  Anne  Bocher  and  Anne  Kyme, 
the  latter  better  known  by  her  maiden  name  of 
Anne  Askew.  This  was  a  lady  of  a  good  Lincoln- 
shire family,  of  distinguished  worth  and  beauty,  who 
had  become  convinced  of  the  error  of  Transubstantia- 
tion.  Compelled  by  her  husband  to  leave  her  home, 
she  was  charged  with  heresy,  "  for  that  she  was  very- 
obstinate  and  heady  in  reasoning  on  matters  of  reli- 
gion." When  in  prison  she  wrote  to  the  King  that  "as 
to  the  Lord's  Supper  she  believed  as  much  as  Christ 
Himself  had  said  of  it,  and  as  much  of  His  divine 
doctrine  as  the  Catholic  Church  had  required." 
These  statements  were  regarded  as  evasions.  She 
was  put  on  the  rack  in  the  hope  that  she  might  in- 
criminate others,  but  nothing  could  be  extorted  from 
her,  although  she  had  been  so  tortured  that  she  was 
unable  to  stand  upright,  and  had  to  be  carried  in  a 
chair  to  Smithlield,  where  she  and  four  others  were 
burned  at  the  stake,  July  16,  1646.  Shaxton,  who 
had  been  deprived  of  the  see  of  Salisbury,  had  re- 
canted, and  preached  the  sermon  at  the  execution, 
expressing  his  compassion  for  heretics,  and  exhort- 
ing them  to  follow  his  example. 

We  have  already  mentioned  the  translation  of  the 
Bible  and  the  placing  of  copies  in  the  churches ; 
and  also  the  publication  of  the  Primer  in  1539.     An 


The  Kinjs  Booh  119 


edition  of  this  book  revised  by  the  King  was  put 
forth  in  1645.  But  it  was  thought  necessary  topro- 
•vide  something  better  in  the  way  of  religious  in- 
struction than  the  Bishops'  Book  (^Institution  of  a 
Christian  Mmi)^  and  a  commission  was  appointed  for 
this  purpose.  The  outcome  was  the  "  King's  Book," 
the  Necessary  Erudition  of  any  Christian  Man  (1542), 
in  which  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation  is  stated 
more  strongly  than  in  the  earlier  book,  whilst  the 
royal  supremacy  is  also  more  forcibly  maintained. 
The  book  was  approved  by  Convocation. 

In  the  following  year  a  revision  of  the  different 
ofBce  books  of  the  Church  was  undertaken,  but 
nothing  considerable  was  achieved  during  this  reign. 
By  direction  of  the  King,  Cranmer  prepared  (1544) 
a  free  English  version  of  the  Litany,  which  came  at 
once  into  use.  On  St.  Luke's  Day,  October  18,  the 
choir  of  St.  Paul's  sang  this  English  Litany  in  pro- 
cession, the  King  having  enjoined  its  use  in  every 
parish  church  every  Sunday  and  festival  day. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that,  in  doctrinal  convic- 
tion, Henry  VIII.  inclined  much  more  to  Gardiner 
and  the  men  of  the  old  learning  than  to  Cranmer 
and  those  of  the  new ;  so  that  there  was  great  un- 
certainty as  to  his  final  arrangements  for  the  future 
government  of  the  Kingdom.  Although  not  an  old 
man — he  was  under  fifty-six  when  he  died — he  had 
become  so  feeble  and  unwieldy  that  he  had  to  be 
taken  up  and  downstairs  by  machinery.  He  was 
induced,  however,  to  have  his  will  made,  and,  in  do- 
ing so,  he  not  only  left  out  the  name  of  Gardiner, 
whom  in  a  previous  testament  he  had  nominated  as 


120  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

one  of  the  executors,  but  otherwise  made  Buch  a 
disposition  as  showed  his  unwillingness  to  give  the 
reactionary  party  control  of  his  son  Edward,  whilst 
he  did  not  show  special  favor  to  the  Reformers. 
Cranmer  and  Tunstall,  now  of  Durham  were  the 
two  Bishops  appointed  among  the  sixteen  Councillors 
who  were  to  have  the  guidance  of  the  young  King, 
until  he  was  eighteen  years  of  age.  Lord  Hertford, 
Edward's  uncle,  belonged  to  the  reforming  party, 
but  Wriothesley,  the  Chancellor,  was  of  the  other. 
In  spite  of  this,  the  real  weight  of  influence  re- 
mained with  the  reformers. 

Among  the  last  acts  of  Henry's  life  was  the  com- 
mand to  arrest  the  Duke  of  Norfolk  and  his  son 
Henry  Howard,  Earl  of  Surrey,  the  poet,  on  a  charge 
of  treason.  They  had  borne  the  arms  of  Edward 
the  Confessor,  claiming  a  right  to  do  so,  and  had 
been  guilty  of  other  imprudences.  Surrey  was  exe- 
cuted on  January  27,  1547.  His  father  was  to  have 
been  put  to  death  on  the  following  day,  but  the  King 
died  in  the  morning,  and  he  was  taken  back  to  prison. 

The  summary  of  Burnet  is  well  considered.  Henry 
Vni.,  he  says,  "is  rather  to  be  reckoned  among  the 
great,  than  the  good  princes.  He  exercised  so  much 
severity  on  men  of  both  persuasions,  that  the  writers 
of  both  sides  have  laid  open  his  faults  and  taxed  his 
cruelty.  But  as  neither  of  them  were  much  obliged 
to  him,  so  none  have  taken  so  much  care  to  set  forth 
his  good  qualities,  as  his  enemies  have  done  to  en- 
large upon  his  vices.  I  do  not  deny  that  he  is  to  be 
numbered  among  the  ill  princes,  yet  I  cannot  rank 
him  with  the  worst." 


Henry  and  the  Reformation.  121 

On  one  point  there  need  be  no  hesitation  in  ex- 
pressing an  opinion.  It  is  utterly  absurd  to  suppose 
that  the  character  of  Henry  VIII.  reflects  any  dis- 
grace or  discredit  upon  the  principles  of  the  Refor- 
mation. Henry  VIII.  had  no  sympathy  whatever 
with  the  reformation  of  doctrine.  Although  strongly 
anti-papal,  in  his  religious  convictions  he  was  medise- 
val  and  Roman. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

EDWARD  VI.  AND  THE  FIRST  PRAYER  BOOK. 

|;ENRY  VIII.  was  not  onlj''  practicnll}'  »ibso- 
lute  during  his  life:  he  was  allowed  to 
regulate  the  succession  to  the  throne  after 
his  death;  and  the  disposition  which  he 
made  was  undisturbed.  Naturally  enough  his  only 
son  was  appointed  to  succeed  him ;  and,  in  case  of 
his  dying  without  heir,  his  elder  sister  Mary  was  to 
come  next,  and  after  her  Elizabeth.  In  case  of  tlie 
failure  of  heirs  to  all  of  them,  the  descendants  of  his 
elder  sister,  Margaret,  were  to  be  passed  by,  and 
those  of  his  younger  sister,  Mary,  to  succeed. 

In  describing  the  events  of  the  reign  of  Edward  VI. 
it  has  been  common  for  writers  on  the  one  hand  to 
select  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  Prayer  Books  of 
the  period,  as  representing  the  true  spirit  of  the  Ref- 
ormation ;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  to  work  up  to  a 
kind  of  climax  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth,  which  is 
regarded  as  tlie  "  Reformation  Settlement."  Such  a 
treatment  of  the  subject  is  the  work  of  an  advocate, 
not  of  an  historian.  Every  student  of  theology  and 
of  history  has  his  convictions  and  his  preferences; 
and  it  would  be  easy  enough  to  conduct  an  argument 
by  way  of  proof  that  either  of  these  books  approached 
perfection,  and  that  either  the  purification  of  the 
earlier  book  was  incomplete,  or  that  the  offices  were 
mutilated  in  the  later  book.    If  our  object  were  to 

129 


Prayer  Book  Revision.  128 


counsel  a  fresh  revision  of  the  Prayer  Book,  remarks 
of  this  kind  would  be  in  place.  As  our  business  is 
quite  different  from  this,  we  shall  endeavor  to  trace 
tlio  succession  of  events  as  they  occurred,  we  shall 
try  to  understand  the  influences  under  which  changes 
were  made,  and  the  significance  which  they  were  in- 
tended to  bear ;  and  in  that  way  we  shall  probably 
afford  the  best  assistance  to  our  readers  in  forming 
their  judgments  on  those  other  points.  Moreover, 
unless  we  are  mistaken,  it  will  become  evident  that, 
amid  all  tlie  superficial  differences  and  all  the  widely 
separated  agencies  in  the  work  of  the  Reformation, 
there  was  not  only  a  singular  unity  of  tendency,  but 
the  evidence  of  an  overruling  Providence  which  was 
shaping  the  work  to  its  end  amid  all  the  rough  hew- 
ing of  its  human  agents. 

Edward  VI.  was  only  nine  years  of  age  when  he 
came  to  the  throne,  so  that  his  father  had  appointed 
sixteen  Councillors  to  guide  him,  foremost  among 
whom  were  his  uncle,  Seymour,  Earl  of  Hertford, 
great  Chamberlain;  Lord  Wriothesley,  Lord  Chan- 
cellor; and  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
According  to  Henry's  will  the  Councillors  were  to 
have  equal  power,  and  on  the  day  of  the  proclama- 
tion of  King  Edward  they  took  an  oath  to  "  main- 
tain the  last  will  and  testament  of  their  Master,  the 
late  King,  and  every  part  and  article  of  the  same  to 
the  uttermost  of  their  power."  In  spite  of  this  it 
was  immediately  pretended  that  it  was  necessary  to 
appoint  one  of  the  council  to  transact  business  with 
the  ambassadors  of  foreign  powers,  and,  notwithstand- 
ing the  opposition  of  Wriothesley,  the  proposal  was 


124  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

carried,  with  the  understanding  that  tlie  person  ap- 
pointed should  not  presume  to  act  without  the  con- 
sent of  the  majority  of  the  counciL  Hertford  was 
immediately  elected  to  be  Protector  of  the  realm  and 
Guardian  of  the  Person  of  the  King,  and  created 
Duke  of  Somerset.  Hertford  was  not  a  man  of  great 
ability  nor  yet  of  high  principle.  Yet  he  was  a  man 
of  tolerably  strong  convictions,  a  Protestant  of  the 
Swiss  type,  rather  than  the  German,  and  an  Eras- 
tian.  He  did  his  best  to  give  effect  to  these  convic- 
tions when  he  became  practically  the  head  of  the 
government  of  England. 

By  way  of  asserting  the  royal  supremacy,  the 
bishops  were  required  to  take  out  new  licences  from 
the  crown.  By  this  requirement,  which  had  been 
enacted  under  Henry  VHI.,  it  was  not  intended  to 
assert  any  spiritual  authority  on  the  part  of  the  Sov- 
ereign ;  but  merely  to  declare  that  the  bishops  de- 
rived their  jurisdiction  from  the  crown.  Shortly  be- 
fore the  death  of  Henry  VIH.  an  act  had  been  passed, 
makinr  over  to  the  King  the  lands  of  all  Chantries, 
Hospi  "^  ^  and  Guilds.  A  Bill  was  now  brought  in 
conferring  the  same  privileges  upon  his  son.  These 
measures  affected  only  the  external  relations  of  the 
Church. 

Soon,  however,  it  became  manifest  that  the  state 
of  things  under  Henry  VHI.  was  not  to  remain  un- 
disturbed. Somerset,  seconded  by  Cranmer,  was  re- 
solved on  serious  changes.  There  is  no  reason  to 
doubt  the  sincerity  of  Cranmer.  Under  Henry  VHI. 
he  had  been  weak  and  compliant;  yet  in  matters  on 
which  he  had  strong  convictions  he  had  not  hesitated 


Cranmer  and  Reform.  125 

to  declare  to  the  King  liis  inability  to  consent  to 
some  of  his  measures.  He  would  obey,  or  at  the 
least  be  silent,  but  he  would  not  approve.  Cranmer 
was  always  a  conservative  reformer,  differing  from 
that  class  who  went  back  simply  to  the  Bible,  which 
meant  their  own  opinions.  Cranmer  stood  on  the 
Bible  as  interpreted  by  Catholic  antiquity.  That 
his  opinion  should  have  become  modified  by  time, 
study,  and  circumstances,  is  nothing  to  be  wondered 
at.  He  was  a  man  of  wide  learning  and  of  unfeigned 
piety ;  but  he  was  not  a  man  of  great  strength  of  will. 
It  could  never  be  said  of  him  tliat  he  used  his  ofiBce 
or  his  opportunities  for  self-aggrandizement,  and  his 
gentleness  and  mercifulness  passed  into  a  proverb. 
He  had  gone  from  media3val  doctrine  to  Lutheran- 
ism  ;  and  at  the  accession  of  Edward  VI.  he  seemed 
to  be  veering  toward  the  Swiss  type  of  reformation. 
A  conflict  soon  arose  between  the  two  parties. 
Ridley,  who  was  at  this  time  chaplain  to  Archbishop 
Cranmer,  in  a  sermon  delivered  in  Lent,  had  sug- 
gested the  destruction  of  sacred  images.  A  number 
of  fanatics,  kept  down  by  the  imperious  will  of  the 
late  King,  were  now  ready  to  break  out.  Bishop 
Gardiner,  true  to  the  position  he  had  taken,  came 
forward  in  defence  of  the  observances  in  use,  con- 
tending that  the  royal  supremacy  was  personal,  that 
it  could  not  be  exercised  by  the  council,  and  there- 
fore, that  no  changes  should  be  made  during  the 
minority  of  Edward  VL  This  theory  did  not  at  all 
comport  with  the  designs  of  the  Protector,  who  re- 
solved upon  a  general  royal  visitation  of  the  whole 
Kingdom,  divided  into  six  circuits. 


126  llie  AnfjUcan  Reformation. 

The  visitors  appointed  were  partly  clergymen  and 
parUy  la3nnen ;  and  during  their  visitation  the 
powers  of  the  Bishop  were  suspended.  They  ad- 
ministered the  oaths  of  allegiance  to  the  Bishop, 
the  Clergy,  and  the  principal  householders,  and 
exacted  from  them  a  promise  of  obedience  to  the 
royjil  injunctions.  These  injunctions  gave  directions 
as  to  the  performance  of  divine  service,  and  were  ac- 
companied by  a  book  of  Homilies,  which,  while  cor- 
recting existing  abuses,  might  prepare  for  further  re- 
forms. At  the  same  time  the  order  was  given  to  pro- 
cure, for  the  instruction  of  the  Clergy  and  for  each 
parish,  a  copy  of  the  Paraphrase  of  Erasmus  on  the 
Now  Testament,  recently  translated  into  English. 
All  images  which  had  been  abused  were  ordered  to 
be  removed. 

Gardiner  took  the  lead  in  opposition  to  the  in- 
novations. He  had  examined  the  Homilies  and  the 
Paraphrase  before  they  were  circulated,  and  began  a 
controversy  with  Somerset  and  Cranmer  on  the  sub- 
ject, maintaining  that  the  books  were  contradictory 
and  that  they  were  in  opposition  to  the  accepted 
doctrine  of  the  Church  in  the  "King's  Book;^'  and 
he  further  urged  that,  during  the  youth  of  the  King, 
the  Church  should  not  be  disturbed  by  innovations. 
For  answer  the  Bishop  was  put  in  prison.  Cranmer 
did  his  best  to  induce  him  to  give  in  ;  but  he  refused 
and  went  back  to  the  Fleet.  Bonner,  for  the  same 
reasons,  was  sent  to  the  same  place  ;  but  he  gave  in 
and  was  set  free.  It  should  be  mentioned  that  the 
Princess  Mary  also  protested  against  the  changes  as 


Changes.  127 

disrespectful  to  the  memory  of  her  father  and  unfair 
to  her  young  brother. 

We  have  already  mentioned  the  assignment  of  the 
property  of  the  Chantries  and  Colleges  to  the  King ; 
but  there  were  other  measures  of  still  greater  impor- 
tance passed  into  law  by  the  first  parliament  of  Ed- 
ward VI.,  such  as  the  order  that,  in  future,  the  Com- 
munion should  be  administered  in  both  kinds,  the 
abolition  of  the  Conge  d^  iXire^  and  the  repeal  of  the 
law  of  the  Six  Articles. 

Along  with  the  order  respecting  the  administration 
of  the  Holy  Communion,  there  were  penalties  im- 
posed upon  any  who  should  treat  the  sacred  ordi- 
nance with  irreverence.  In  regard  to  the  appoint- 
ment of  bishops,  it  was  no  longer  to  be  by  the  elec- 
tion of  the  Chapter,  but  by  royal  letters  patent.  It  is 
possible  that  this  change  was  intended  to  assert  the 
royal  prerogative ;  but  it  must  be  remembered  that 
many  regard  the  Conge  cC  elire^  which  has  been  re- 
stored, and  is  the  present  practice  in  the  Church  of 
England,  as  something  like  a  farce. 

Although  the  Clergy  had  submitted  to  the  imper- 
ious will  of  the  late  King,  they  were  now,  by  tlie  re- 
peal of  ^sveral  of  the  penal  laws,  set  free  to  discuss 
in  theii  convocations,  subjects  which  were  previously 
forbidden  to  them.  They  availed  themselves  of 
these  liberties  by  addressing  to  the  Archbishop 
certain  requests — that  the  committee  appointed  in 
the  late  reign  to  revise  the  canons  should  be  revived 
and  their  work  completed  ;  that  the  clergy  might  be 
represented  in  Parliament,  or  else,  that  no  measures 
relating  to  the  Church  should  be  adopted  without 


128  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

their  concurrence ;  that  they  should  be  made  ac- 
quainted with  the  vA'^ork  done  by  the  committee  ap- 
pointed for  the  revision  of  the  services  of  the 
Church.  They  urged  that  they  should  have  the 
royal  licence  tliat  they  might  take  into  consideration 
matters  of  interest  for  the  Church. 

The  Archbishop,  apparently,  was  but  little  in- 
clined to  take  the  same  view  of  the  case.  The 
Book  of  Homilies  had  been  put  forth  without  any 
consultation  with  Convocation  or  Parliament ;  and 
notwithstanding  the  petition  of  the  Clergy  that  they 
should  be  consulted,  a  proclamation  came  forth, 
March  8th,  1548,  giving  the  royal  sanction  to  a  new 
Communion  office,  which  had  been  drawn  up  by 
Cranmer  and  certain  bishops  and  divines  associated 
with  him.  The  King's  proclamation  declared  that  it 
was  established  on  the  "  advice  of  his  dear  uncle  and 
others  of  his  Privy  Council."  This  manner  of  pro- 
cedure would  seem  somewhat  irregular;  but  it  is 
not  fair  to  represent  it  as  an  illustration  of  the  prev- 
alent Erastianism  of  the  period.  The  office  had  the 
sanction  of  the  spiritual  head  of  the  English  Church, 
and  was  then  promulgated  by  royal  authority ;  and 
many  authoritative  acts  of  the  Church  of  Rome  have 
had  precisely  the  same  kind  of  authority,  that  of  the 
Pope  enforced  by  that  of  the  Emperor  or  one  of  the 
Kingi3. 

With  regard  to  the  contents  of  the  office  for 
Holy  Communion,  the  canon  stood  exactly  as  it  had 
done  in  the  Saruni  Missal,  and  the  whole  service  was 
to  be  used  as  before ;  but  there  was  an  exhortation 
provided,  which  was  to  be  read  on  the  Sunday  or  Holy 


New  Communion  Office,  129 

Day,  or  at  least  one  day,  before  the  celebration  of  the 
Sacrament;  and  the  confession  and  comfortable  words 
were  introduced,  being  derived  principally  from  the 
"  Consultation  "  of  Hermann,  Archbishop  of  Cologne. 
By  this  office  the  Cup  was  restored  to  the  Laity,  the 
Mass  was  turned  into  the  Communion,  and  the 
Service,  in  part  at  least,  rendered  in  "  a  tongue  un- 
derstanded  of  the  people." 

The  book  was  issued  with  the  proclamation, 
March  8,  and  five  days  later  the  Bishops  had  let- 
ters sent  to  them  by  the  council,  requiring  them  to 
distribute  it  through  their  dioceses  in  time  for  the 
Curates  to  prepare  for  the  administration  of  the 
Communion  in  that  manner  at  the  approaching 
Easter  (April  1)  ;  also  bidding  them  direct  their 
clergy  to  use  "  such  good,  gentle,  and  charitable  in- 
struction of  their  simple  and  unlearned  parishioners, 
that  there  might  be  one  uniform  manner  quietly 
used  in  all  parts  of  the  realm." 

It  is  quite  evident  that  some  of  the  Bishops  and  a 
large  number  of  the  Clergy  were  not  well  affected  to 
the  changes ;  and,  instead  of  obeying  the  admonition 
of  the  Council,  they  stirred  up  their  people  to  discon- 
tent, so  much  that  a  proclamation  was  issued  (April 
24)  forbidding  any  to  preach  who  had  not  a  licence 
from  the  King,  the  Lord  Protector,  or  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury,  which  was  made  still  more 
stringent  (September  23)  by  the  entire  prohibition 
of  preaching,  that  the  "loving  subjects  "  of  the  King 
might,  in  the  meantime  "  occupy  themselves  to 
God's  honor  with  due  prayer  in  the  Church,  and  pa- 
tient hearing  of  the  godly  Homilies,  and  bo  en- 
I 


130  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

deavor  themselves  that  they  may  be  the  more  ready 
with  thankful  obedience  to  receive  a  most  quiet, 
godly,  and  uniform  order  to  be  had  throughout  his 
realms  and  dominions." 

The  reformers  were  between  two  fires,  that  of  the 
innovators  who  would  spare  nothing  which  seemed 
in  any  way  to  countenance  Roman  doctrine  or  ritual, 
and  that  of  the  reactionaries  who  thought  that  things 
had  gone  too  far  already.  Consequently  it  became 
necessary,  on  the  one  hand,  to  repress  those  who 
were  given  to  change,  which  was  done  by  a  procla- 
mation issued  in  February ;  and  on  the  other,  by  a 
second  proclamation  in  the  same  month  to  dis- 
courage the  reactionaries,  giving  orders  that  all 
images  should  be  removed  from  the  Churches,  since 
the  previous  command  to  remove  only  those  which 
had  been  abused  had  caused  much  contention.  The 
silencing  of  the  licenced  preachers  is  a  proof  that 
they  were  supposed  to  have  abused  their  opportu- 
nities. 

Gardiner,  who  had  been  set  at  liberty,  was  again 
at  the  head  of  the  men  of  the  old  learning.  He 
seems  to  have  acted,  for  a  time,  not  only  with  pru- 
dence, but  with  a  fair  amount  of  consistency. 
Apparently,  he  was  willing  to  conform  silently  to 
the  new  state  of  things,  but  he  could  not  be  induced 
to  give  his  approval.  Before  long,  however,  he 
began  to  give  expression  to  his  dissatisfaction  with 
the  proceedings  of  the  Council,  and  to  ally  himself 
with  the  reactionaries.  Accordingly  he  was  required 
by  the  Council  to  preach  before  the  King ;  and  an 
attempt  was  made  to  induce  him  to  preach  from 


Gardiner^ s  Sermon.  131 

notes  furnished  to  him  by  Cecil,  afterwards  Lord 
Burleigh,  wiio  was  then  secretary  to  the  Duke  of 
Somerset.  This  he  declined  to  do.  Pie  was  told 
again  not  to  preach  about  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar,  and  further  that,  when  he  mentioned  the 
authority  of  the  King,  he  should  add,  "and  the 
Council."     The  sermon  was  delivered  June  29,1548. 

The  accounts  of  this  sermon  do  not  quite  agree ; 
but,  as  Burnet  sjiys  he  had  seen  large  notes  of  it,  his 
outline  may  be  accepted  as  trustworthy.  He  tells 
us  how  Gardiner  declared  that  the  Pope's  supremacy 
was  justly  abolished,  and  that  he  approved  of  the 
suppression  of  Monasteries  and  Chantries.  He 
thought  that  images  might  be  well  used ;  but  they 
might  also  be  well  taken  away.  He  approved  of  the 
Sacrament  in  both  kinds,  and  regarded  the  taking 
away  of  the  great  number  of  masses  as  satisfactory ; 
and  he  liked  the  new  order  for  the  Communion ;  but 
he  asserted  largely  the  presence  of  Christ's  flesh  and 
blood  in  the  Sacrament.  "  Of  the  King's  authority 
under  age,"  says  Burnet,  **  and  of  the  power  of  the 
Council  in  that  case,  he  said  not  a  word;  and  upon 
that  he  was  imprisoned." 

There  is  little  doubt  that  this  was  the  point  in 
which  he  gave  offence.  Some  authorities  declare 
that,  in  this  sermon,  he  protested,  as  he  had  done 
before,  against  the  Council  exercising  such  authority 
during  the  minority  of  the  King.  But  whether  this 
be  so,  or  whether  it  was  that  his  silence  was  suffi- 
ciently offensive  to  the  Council,  it  is  here  that  we 
find  the  reason  for  his  imprisonment.  Many  attempts 
were  made  to  induce  him  to  yield ;  but  in  vain,  and 


132  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

he  was  deprived  of  his  bishopric,  and  remained  in 
prison  until  tlie  end  of  the  reign.  "  These  proceed- 
ings against  hira,"  says  Burnet,  "  were  tliought  too 
severe  and  without  law;  but  he  being  generally 
hated,  they  were  not  so  much  censured,  as  they  had 
been,  if  they  had  fallen  on  a  more  acceptable  man." 

In  the  month  of  July,  in  the  same  year,  Cranmer 
put  forth  his  Catechism,  or  Large  Instruction  of 
young  persons  in  the  grounds  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion. In  accordance  with  prevailing  Roman  and 
Lutheran  usage,  he  reckoned  the  first  two  com- 
mandments as  one.  He  remarks  that  many  of  the 
ancients  divided  them  in  two ;  but  this  was  of  no 
importance  so  long  as  no  part  of  the  decalogue  was 
suppressed.  He  declares  that  the  pleas  employed 
for  the  use  of  images  were  exactly  the  same  as  those 
offered  by  the  heathen  in  excuse  of  their  idolatry. 
They  also  said  they  did  not  worship  the  image,  but 
only  that  which  was  represented  by  it.  Besides  the 
two  great  Sacraments,  he  asserts  the  power  of  recon- 
ciling sinners  to  God  as  a  third ;  and  declares  the 
divine  institution  of  bishops  and  priests;  he  is  in 
favor  of  the  restoration  of  public  penance,  and 
counsels  the  use  of  confession  by  the  people  to  their 
pastors,  that  they  might  bind  and  loose  according  to 
the  Gospel.  Formerly  Cranmer  had  used  language 
respecting  ecclesiastical  offices,  which  seemed  to  im- 
ply that  the  Sovereign  had  the  power  to  confer  them; 
but  in  this  work,  which  was  all  his  own,  "he  fully 
sets  forth  their  divine  institution."  But  another  and 
a  more  important  work  was  now  on  hand,  and  one 
which,  from  every  point  of  view,  has  the  deepest 


Compilers  of  Prayer  Booh.  1S3 

significance  for  all  the  future  history  of  the  Church 
of  England  and  of  the  Anglican  Communion.  This 
was  the  compilation  of  the  first  Book  of  Common 
Prayer. 

The  question  has  been  debated  as  to  the  company  by 
whom  the  Prayer  Book  was  complied ;  but  there  seems 
no  good  reason  for  doubting  that  the  work  was  done 
by  the  same  commission  of  bishops  and  divines,  sit- 
ting at  Windsor,  who  had  drawn  up  the  English 
additions  to  the  Communion  ofBce.  This  company 
consisted  of  the  Archbishop,  six  other  bishops,  and 
six  doctors,  the  leading  members  of  whom  were  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer,  Bishops  Ridley,  Goodrich,  and 
Holbeach,  representatives  of  the  new  learning,  Drs. 
May,  Cox,  Taylor,  and  Haynes,  advanced  reformers, 
whilst  the  old  learning  was  represented  by  Bishops 
Thirlby,  Skip,  and  May,  and  others. 

In  regard  to  the  sources  of  the  Anglican  services 
and  the  principles  on  which  they  were  drawn  up, 
more  minute  and  extensive  information  must  be 
sought  in  works  on  Liturgiology.*  But  it  is  necessary 
to  give  here  some  general  account  of  the  work  which 
was  now  done  and  of  the  principles  by  which  the 
doers  of  it  professed  to  be  guided,  and  actually  were 
guided.  In  one  word,  the  principles  of  liturgical  re- 
construction were  those  which  underlay  the  whole 
movement  of  the  English  Reformation.  There  was 
no  iconoclastic  fury,  there  was  no  intention  of  unnec- 
essary change ;  but  there  was  a  fixed  purpose  to  bring 

'  We  may  mention  Palmer's  "  Origines  Litargicse ; "  Brightman's 
"Eiistern  Liturgies,"  "Procter  on  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer," 
and  Freeman's  '*  Principles  of  Divine  Service." 


134  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

back  the  services  to  the  tone  and  spirit  of  the  earlier 
centuries — the  centuries  of  the  first  four  (Ecumenical 
Councils,  and  to  make  them  more  available  for  gen- 
eral use.  Some  would  have  extended  the  Catholic 
period  to  include  six  councils,  or  even  all  those 
seven  which  were  recognized  by  the  East  and  West 
alike;  but  this  makes  little  practical  difference, 
except  in  regard  to  the  use  of  images  sanctioned  by 
the  seventh,  the  second  Council  of  Nicaea. 

To  begin  with  Matins  and  Evensong,  the  two 
daily  services,  these  were  formed  from  the  eight 
services  of  the  Breviary,  in  which  provision  was 
made  for  an  office  to  be  said  every  three  hours. 
These  services  had  become  restricted  to  the  Clergy 
and  the  religious  orders;  and  it  was  the  aim  of  the 
reformers  to  put  them  into  such  a  shape  that  they 
could  be  used  in  public,  and  the  people  at  large  could 
take  part  in  them.  To  this  end  three  things  had  to 
be  done.  These  services,  especially  the  Nocturns, 
were  very  long,  and  as  eight  of  them  had  to  be  reduced 
to  two,  a  considerable  amount  of  condensation  was 
required.  Then  secondly,  all  expressions  represent- 
ing doctrines  unknown  to  the  earlier  ages  and  at 
variance  with  primitive  teaching,  had  to  be  with- 
drawn ;  and  finally  the  English  language  had  to  be 
substituted  for  the  Latin.  This  was  the  work  un- 
dertaken by  the  Commission  at  Windsor,  which  re- 
sulted in  the  First  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI. 
And  this  book  was  so  excellent  that  it  has  remained 
in  substance  the  Office  Book  of  all  branches  of  the 
Anglican  Communion,  and  is  likely  so  to  remain. 
These  remarks  apply  not  merely  to  the  daily  offices, 


'■^^-^-^.t^wtv  Liir,,  ifc  -lii'i  ■ — -^ 


The  Prayer  Booh.  185 

but  also  to  the  great  Central  Service,  or  Liturgy 
proper,  of  the  Holy  Eucharist,  and  all  the  other 
services. 

These  principles  are,  in  substance,  set  forth  in  the 
Preface  to  the  book.  The  Compilers  point  out  what 
they  believe  to  have  been  the  design  of  the  "ancient 
fathers  "  in  drawing  up  the  divine  service.  In  the 
first  place,  they  intended  "  that  the  whole  Bible  or 
the  greatest  part  thereof  should  be  read  over  once  in 
the  year."  But  "  this  godly  and  decent  order  of  the 
ancient  fathers,"  they  say,  "hath  been  so  altered, 
broken,  and  neglected  by  planting  in  uncertain 
stories,  legends,  responds,  verses,  vain  repetitions, 
commemorations  and  synodals,  that  commonly  when 
any  book  of  the  Bible  was  begun,  before  three  or 
four  chapters  were  read  out,  all  the  rest  were  unread." 
This  evil  they  remedied  by  the  omission  of  non-biblical 
lessons  and  the  new  calendar,  by  which  nearly  the 
whole  Bible  was  ordered  to  be  read  in  the  course  of 
a  year. 

Apart  from  this,  however,  they  said,  the  services 
were  of  such  a  character  as  not  to  be  adapted  for 
popular  use.  "  The  service  in  this  Church  of  Eng- 
land, these  many  years,  hath  been  read  in  Latin,  to 
the  people,  which  they  understood  not;  so  that  they 
have  heard  with  their  ears  only,  and  their  lieart, 
spirit,  and  mind  have  not  been  edified  thereby." 
Again,  they  say,  "  the  number  and  hardness  of  the 
rules  called  the  Pie,  and  the  manifold  changings  of 
the  service,  was  the  cause  that  to  turn  the  book  only 
was  so  hard  and  intricate  a  matter,  that  many  times 
there  was  more  business  to  find  out  what  should  be 


186  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

read  than  to  read  it  when  it  was  found  out."  To 
do  away  with  these  difficulties,  "such  like  things  as 
did  break  the  continual  course  of  the  reading  of  the 
scripture"  were  cut  off;  and  rules  set  forth  "few 
in  number,"  and  also  "p^ain  and  easy  to  be  under- 
Btanded."  Among  other  advantages,  one  would  be 
that  "by  this  order  the  curates  shall  need  none  other 
books  for  their  public  service  but  this  Book  and  the 
Bible  ;  by  the  means  whereof  the  })eople  shall  not  be 
at  so  great  charge  for  books,  as  in  time  past  they 
have  been." 

The  daily  services  of  Matins  and  Evensong,  as 
has  been  said,  were  taken  from  the  Breviary ;  Mat- 
ins, Lauds,  and  Prime  forming  the  office  for  Morn- 
ing Prayer,  Vespers  and  Compline  for  Evensong. 

The  principal  points  in  which  the  first  Prayer 
Book  of  Edward  VI.  differs  from  that  which  is  now 
in  use  are :  (1)  It  begins  with  the  Lord's  Prayer  ; 
(2)  It  ends  with  the  third  Collect ;  (3)  There  was 
no  direction  to  use  the  Litany,  which  was  put  in 
different  places  in  different  editions  of  the  Book; 
(4)  Only  the  evangelical  canticles  are  given. 

The  Litany  was  the  same  which  had  been  drawn 
up  by  Cranmer  in  1544,  with  the  omission  of  the  in- 
vocation of  saints. 

The  Communion  Office  was  founded  upon  that  of 
the  Sarum  Missal,  with  additions  from  some  of  the 
Oriental  Liturgies,  and  with  those  parts  adapted 
from  Hermann's  Consultation  which  had  been  taken 
into  the  office  of  1548.  Whilst  Antiphons  were  re- 
jected, the  Introits  were  retained ;  and  these,  to- 
gether with  the  Collects,  Epistles,  and  Gospels,  were 


Changes  Made.  1S7 


generally  the  same  as  in  the  Sarum  Missal.  Among 
the  features  omitted  from  the  English  office  is,  first, 
the  preparation  of  the  Priest  before  iMass  and  before 
beginning  the  Canon.  In  the  Canon  the  portion 
now  forming  the  Prayer  for  the  Church  Militant  re- 
tained its  place  as  before.  The  sign  of  the  cross  in 
the  consecration  of  the  bread  and  wine  was  retained  ; 
but  no  breaking  of  the  bread  was  ordered.  There 
Wiis  retained  also  a  thanksgiving  for  the  grace  and 
virtue  in  the  Saints,  "and  chiefly  in  the  glorious  and 
most  blessed  Virgin  Mary,  Mother  of  Thy  Son  Jesu 
Christ  our  Lord  and  God;'  and  then  was  added  an 
invocation  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  taken  from  the  Eastern 
Liturgies.  The  prayer,  which  now  immediately  fol- 
lows the  Lord's  Prayer,  was  here  the  concluding 
portion  of  the  Canon.  When  we  add  that,  at  the 
presentation  of  the  Elements,  a  little  water  was 
added  to  the  wine,  we  have  indicated  the  principal 
characteristics  of  this  office.  The  rubric  ordered 
that,  at  the  Communion,  "the  Priest  that  shall  exe- 
cute the  holy  ministry  .shall  put  upon  him  the  ves- 
ture appointed  for  that  ministration,  that  is  to  say,  a 
white  Alb  plain,  with  a  vestment  or  cope — "  a  rubric 
to  which  reference  will  have  to  be  made  hereafter. 
At  this  point  it  may  be  well  to  offer  some  remarks 
on  the  ritual  directions  in  the  Communion  office. 
Two  extreme  theories  have  been  held,  on  the  one 
hand,  that  omission  is  prohibition ;  on  the  other 
hand,  that  everything  which  was  not  explicitly  con- 
demned or  forbidden  was  allowed. 

Either  of  these  theories  could  be  defended  by  an 
advocate  who  had  taken  in  hand  to  "  defend  a  thesis." 


138  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Neither  could  satisfy  a  spirit  of  loyalty  or  of  com- 
mon sense.  It  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  every  move- 
ment on  the  part  of  the  celebrant  should  be  pre- 
scribed by  the  rubric  :  it  is  equally  absurd  to  imag- 
ine that  every  ceremony  was  allowed  to  be  continued, 
unless  it  was  actually  forbidden.  Undoubtedly,  it 
was  intended  that  there  should  be,  for  a  time  at  least, 
considerable  diversity  of  usage.  Tliere  were  many 
who  objected  to  the  ceremonial  observances  of  the 
older  ritual ;  hxiz  there  were  others  who  would  have 
found  it  irksome  and  even  difficult  to  adopt  new 
n  ''\ods.  We  may  be  quite  sure  that  men  of  the 
spirit  of  Cranmer  intended,  as  far  as  possible,  to 
meet  the  wishes  of  both  of  these  classes.  Doubt- 
less, it  was  hoped  that,  in  time,  asperities  on  both 
sides  would  be  softened,  and  a  middle  way  might  be 
found  in  which  they  could  meet.  Such  a  result 
would,  at  least,  be  an  illustration  of  the  true  spirit 
of  the  English  Reformation.  If  it  has  not  been  en- 
tirely realized,  the  exceptions  and  departures  are  less 
numerous  and  less  great  than  they  have  seemed. 
How  far  the  blame  of  these  is  to  be  .attached  to  the 
one  side  or  the  other  it  is  not  necessary  in  this  place 
to  inquire. 

Convocation  was  sitting  at  the  time  when  the 
work  was  completed  and  submitted  to  Parliament ; 
but  the  records  of  Convocation  are  lost,  so  that  we 
have  no  direct  evidence  of  the  Prayer  Book  having 
received  their  ar)proval.  For  this  reason  there  are 
some  who  maintain  that  it  never  came  before  Convo- 
cation; and  that  this  is  proved  by  the  fact  that 
several  of  the  bishops  afterwards  opposed  the  Act 


Accepted  by   Convocation.  139 

of  Uniformity  by  which  it  was  enforced.  The  evi- 
dence on  the  otlier  side,  however,  is  practically  irre- 
sistible. The  message  of  King  Edward  to  the  Dev- 
onshire rebels  declares  that  the  book  was  "  by  the 
whole  clergy  agreed."  So  also  the  letter  from  tlie 
King  and  Council  to  Bonner  says  that  it  was  ac- 
cepted "  by  the  bishops  and  all  other  learned  men  in 
this  our  realm  in  their  synods  and  convocations  pro- 
vincial." If  it  should  be  said  that  the  Council  of 
the  period  were  capable  of  misrepresentation,  it  ni.ay 
be  answered  that  this  would  have  been  instantly  de- 
tected and  exposed. 

As  regards  the  opposition  to  the  Act  of  Parlia- 
ment, it  is  quite  possible  that  men  might  approve  of 
the  book,  and  yet  not  be  willing  to  enforce  its  use 
under  penalties,  or  to  do  so  all  at  once.  Having  re- 
gard to  these  considerations,  it  can  hardly  be  neces- 
sary to  quote  authorities  on  the  subject. 

The  book  was  authorized  by  an  Act  of  Parliament 
which  we  may  call  the  first  Act  of  Uniformity  (2 
and  3  Edward  VI.  C.  1).  There  can  therefore  be  no 
doubt  that  this  is  the  book  referred  to  in  the  rubric 
at  the  beginning  of  the  present  Prayer  Book,  when 
it  speaks  of  the  "  second  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
Edward  VI."  It  was  finally  read  the  third  time  in 
the  House  of  Lords,  January  15,  and  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  January  21,  1549.  The  Act  required 
that  the  book  should  be  used  at  Whitsuntide,  or 
earlier,  if  copies  could  be  procured.  As  a  matter  of 
fact  it  was  used  in  tlie  Londo.i  Churches  at  Easter 
(April  21)  and  in  the  country  at  large,  at  Pentecost 
(June  9). 


140  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

The  Act  of  Uniformity  by  which  the  use  of  the 
Prayer  Book  was  authorized  and  enforced  gave  rea- 
sons for  its  compilation  and  its  form  similar  to  those 
contained  in  the  Preface  to  the  book.  Penalties  are 
proclaimed  against  all  who  resist  the  use  of  the  book 
or  deprave  it;  for  the  first  offence  loss  of  the  profits 
of  one  benefice  for  a  year  and  imprisonment  for  six 
months;  for  a  second  offence  loss  of  all  benefices 
and  imprisonment  for  a  year;  and  for  a  third  offence 
imprisonment  for  life. 

The  r«nie  Parliament  passed  an  "Act  to  take  a.vay 
all  positive  laws  made  against  the  marriage  of 
priests."  (2  and  3  Edward  VI.  C.  21).  The  right 
of  marriage  among  the  clergy  had  been  unanimously 
asserted  by  the  Convocation  at  the  beginning  cf  the 
reign  of  King  Edward ;  but  the  anti-reforming 
bishops  had  opposed  the  bill  introduced  to  legalize 
the  proposal.  The  Parliament  now  declared  that  it 
was  better  for  the  clergy  to  remain  in  the  single 
state,  but  that  all  obligation  to  do  so  was  now  re- 
moved. 

The  observance  of  Lent  was  enforced  by  the  same 
Parliament  (2  and  3  Edward  VI.  C.  19).  The  eat- 
ing of  flesh  was  forbidden  on  Fridays  and  Saturdays 
in  Lent,  on  Ember  days,  and  generally  on  all  fast 
days,  the  reason  given  being  not  religious  expediency 
or  ecclesiastical  custom,  but  the  beneficial  effect  of 
fasting  on  the  bodily  health,  and  the  interests  of  the 
fishermen. 

It  was  soon  discovered  that  the  new  Prayer  Book 
was  not  to  find  universal  acceptance  ;  and  the  oj)po- 
Bition  to  its  use  was  strengthened  by  the  bishops  and 


Opposition  to  the  Prayer  Booh.  141 

clergy  of  the  old  learning.  Many  of  them  managed 
to  make  the  services  inaudible,  and  in  other  ways  so 
similar  to  those  which  had  made  place  for  them  that, 
to  the  congregation,  they  seemed  the  same.  Some 
also  used  in  the  Communion  Services  many  of  the 
old  ceremonies,  "  such  as  crossing  the  altar,  crossing 
themselves,  lifting  the  book  from  one  place  to  an- 
other, breathing  on  the  bread,  showing  it  openly  be- 
fore the  distribution,"  ^  and  so  forth. 

As  a  consequence  a  second  visitation  took  place  in 
the  Autumn  of  1549,  which  was  intended  to  give 
effect  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  and  to  stop  those 
irregular  practices,  as  is  apparent  from  the  contents 
of  the  articles.  Some  of  the  practices  mentioned 
were  forbidden,  such  as  kissing  the  altar,  shifting  the 
book,  breathing  upon  the  bread  or  chalice,  and  the 
like.  It  was  also  ordered  that  not  more  than  one 
Communion  should  be  held  in  one  day  in  any  Church 
or  Chapel.  Orders  were  also  sent  by  the  Council  to 
the  Bishop  of  London,  Bonner,  to  see  that  there 
should  be  no  special  masses  in  St.  Paul's  Cathedral, 
since  that,  being  the  Mother  Church  in  the  principal 
city  of  the  Kingdom,  would  be  regarded  as  an  ex- 
ample to  all  the  rest.  Bonner  sent  the  letter  to  the 
Dean  and  Canons  residentiary;  and  there  and  else- 
where obedience  seems  to  have  been  so  complete  that 
the  visitors  made  no  complaint. 

About  this  time  there  arose  a  controversy,  which 
was  destined  to  last  for  centuries  in  the  Anglican 
Communion,  respecting  tlie  presence  of  Christ  in 
the  Sacrament.    There  was  no  doctrine  for  which 

*  Burnet. 


142  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

■     ■■1^1 —  ■■^■-  -       ill.       -  ■—  ■—       —I.I    ~.  I  I.I—.     I    ■■  ■■  ■  I    I  ,       -  — 1(^— — 

one  school  contended  so  strenuously,  or  which  was 
so  vigorously  attacked  by  another  school,  as  the  doc- 
trine of  Transubstantiation.  Since  the  Lateran 
Council  of  A.  D.  1216  this  had  been  the  accepted 
doctrine  of  the  Western  Church,  the  Greek  Church 
holding  a  theory  so  ne;irly  allied  to  this  that  it  is  to 
this  day  disputed  whether  they  are  not  identical. 
The  Lutheran  doctrine,  called  by  others,  but  not  by 
the  authoritative  documents  of  that  Church,  Con- 
substantiation,  asserted  the  presence  of  the  Body  of 
Christ,  but  denied  the  removal  of  the  substance  of 
bread  and  wine,  Avhich  the  Romans  affirmed.  The 
Swiss  divines  went  further,  Calvin  holding  a  kind  of 
real  presence,  of  which  believing  communicants  were 
made  participants  by  entering  by  faith  into  the 
holiest  of  all ;  and  Zwingli  holding  that  the  Sacra- 
ment was  merely  a  commemoration  of  the  death  of 
Christ. 

Two  eminent  foreigners,  recently  arrived  in  Eng- 
land, took  a  prominent  part  in  these  controversies. 
One  was  Martin  Bucer,  an  Alsatian,  a  contemporary 
and  fellow-worker  with  Luther.  He  was  a  man  of 
extensive  learning  and  of  great  moderation,  who  had 
attempted  to  mediate  between  Luther  and  Zwingli. 
He  was  born  in  1491 ;  and  was  brought  over  to 
Cambridge,  by  Cranmer,  to  be  Professor  of  Divinity, 
in  1549.  He  died  at  Cambridge,  February  27,  1551. 
The  other  was  Peter  Martyr,  an  Italian,  born  1500, 
and  dying  at  Zurich  in  1562.  Adopting  the  princi- 
ples of  the  Swiss  Reformation,  while  still  Prior  at 
Lucca,  he  fled  from  Italy,  and  in  1547  came  to  Eng- 
land, and  was  appointed  lecturer  in  the  Holy  Scrip- 


Controversies  on  the  Eucharist.  148 

tures  at  Oxford.     On  the  accession  of  Mary  he  re- 
turned to  the  Continent. 

Burnet  says  that  the  Roman  party  at  Oxford  were 
much  encouraged  by  the  indulgence  of  the  govern- 
ment and  the  gentleness  of  Cranmer's  temper,  so 
that  on  this  head  they  became  "insolent  out  of 
measure."  Controversies  also  broke  out  at  Cam- 
bridge on  the  subject  of  Transubstantiation.  A 
chief  interest  in  these  controversies  for  ourselves  is 
found  in  the  fact  that  Ridley  and  Cranmer  had  been 
led  by  the  reading  of  the  treatise  of  Bertram 
(Ratramnus)  to  discover  that  in  the  ninth  century 
th3  theory  of  Radbert  had  been  called  in  question. 
It  might  be  hazardous  to  say  that  this  book  exactly 
represJeiits  the  permanent  opinions  of  Cranmer ;  but 
it  is  probable  that  he  would  have  accepted  its  con- 
tents for  the  most  part.^ 

One  of  the  unhappy  incidents  of  this  time  was  the 
persecution  of  the  Anabaptists,  many  of  whom, 
escaping  from  persecutions  in  Germany,  had  sought 
refuge  in  England.  They  rejected  all  doctrines  not 
found  in  the  Bible,  also  Infant  Baptism.  But  a 
more  extreme  faction  among  them  went  much 
further,  denying  nearly  all  Christian  doctrine,  and 
setting  themselves  up  as  the  fifth  monarchy.  Several 
of  them  who  had  disseminated  their  opinions,  re- 
canted and  were  let  off  with  light  punishments. 
But  one  of  them,  Joan  Bocher,  called  Joan  of  Kent, 
asserted  the  Mennonite  doctrine,  that  Christ  was  not 
truly  incarnate.     She  was  found  guilty  of  blasphemy 

'  Burnet  gives  a  summnry  of  Bertram's  argnment ;  and  Dr.  Pnsey 
takei  the  book  as  representing  the  views  of  liidley  and  Cranmer. 


144  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

and  sentenced  to  be  burned.  The  young  King  was 
most  reluctant  to  sign  the  warrant;  but  Cranmer 
persuaded  him,  yet  without  wholly  convincing  him; 
for  he  set  his  hand  to  the  warrant  with  tears  in  his 
eyes,  telling  Cranmer  that,  if  he  did  wrong,  it  was 
in  submission  to  his  authority,  and  he  should  answer 
for  it  to  God.  Tlie  Archbishop  was  so  moved  by 
this  that  he  sought  to  prevent  the  execution ;  and  he 
and  Ridley  endeavored  to  get  the  woman  to  recant, 
a  suggestion  which  she  received  with  so  much  inso- 
lence that  they  had  to  desist,  and  so  she  was  burned 
(May,  1549).  The  Romans  were  not  slow  to  justify 
themselves  by  the  practice  of  their  opponents. 

Tumults  broke  out  in  various  parts  of  England 
and  grew  considerable  in  Devonshire,  as  being  dis- 
tant from  the  court,  and  "  generally  inclined  to  the 
former  superstition,  and  many  of  the  old  priests 
were  in  among  them."  Among  the  demands  formu- 
lated by  the  rebels  there  were  such  as  these,  that  all 
the  general  Councils  should  be  observed,  that  the  Six 
Articles  should  be  revived,  that  the  Mass  should  be 
in  Latin,  that  the  Sacrament  should  be  elevated  and 
worshipped.  Cranmer  was  instructed  by  the  Council 
to  answer  the  articles,  which  he  did,  pointing  out  that 
their  demands  were  insolent,  dictated  by  seditious 
priests ;  that  they  knew  nothing  of  the  decrees  of 
general  Councils  none  of  which  were  contravened  by 
the  Church  of  England  ;  the  elevation  and  adoration 
of  the  Sacrament  was  a  recent  innovation,  and  so 
forth.  Finally  they  were  defeated  and  dispersed  here 
and  elsewhere;  and  a  general  pardon  was  proclaimed, 
some  of  the  ringleaders  being  punished  as  a  warning. 


Bonner* 8  Imprisonment. 


145 


Soon  after  this  Bonner  was  in  trouble  again.  We 
have  seen  that  he  complied  with  the  command  of  the 
Council  that  he  should  enforce  the  use  of  the  new 
Service  book.  But  he  was  known  to  favor  the  mal- 
contents; so  he  was  required  to  preach  at  Paul's 
Cross  in  approval  of  the  new  settlement,  condem- 
ning rebellion,  and  declaring  the  authority  of  the  King 
as  not  being  affected  by  his  minority.  By  way  of 
response  he  preached  to  a  great  assembly  (Sept.  1), 
dwelling  principally  on  the  corporal  presence  of 
Christ  in  the  Sacrament  and  saying  nothing  on  the 
Supremacy.  Accordingly  he  was  deprived,  and  sent 
to  the  Tower. 

The  fall  of  Somerset,  the  Protector,  took  place  in 
the  autumn  of  1549;  but  this  requires  us  to  go  back 
to  an  earlier  part  of  the  same  year,  to  mention  the 
case  of  the  admiral,  his  younger  brother.  Sir 
Thomas  Seymour,  afterward  Lord  Sudeley,  had  been 
attached  to  Catharine  Parr;  but  the  King's  com- 
mand could  not  be  resisted,  and  she  became  the  sixth 
wife  of  Henry  VIII.  Not  long  after  his  death  she 
married  Seymour  and  died  in  childbirth  in  the  fol- 
lowing year  (1548).  Soon  after  the  death  of  Catha- 
rine, he  began  to  pay  his  addresses  to  the  Princess 
Elizabeth.  As  it  had  been  declared  treason  to 
marry  the  King's  sisters  without  consent  of  Council, 
he  began  to  make  preparations  to  carry  off  the  King 
and  resist  the  authority  of  the  council.  The  Pro- 
tector, his  brother,  warned  him  in  vain ;  and  on 
January  19,  1549,  he  was  sent  to  the  tower.  Re- 
fusing to  make  submission,  he  was  attainted,  found 
guilty  of  treason  and  executed,  March  20. 

J 


146  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Somerset's  own  turn  was  soon  to  come.  Dudley, 
Earl  of  Warwick,  son  of  one  of  the  instruments  of 
the  rapacity  of  Henry  VII.,  was  rising  in  importance ; 
and  Somerset  had  lost  favor  partly  through  his  greed 
and  ambition,  partly  through  his  misgovernment. 
He  was  accused  of  violating  the  condition  on  which 
he  was  made  Protector,  that  he  should  do  nothing 
without  the  consent  of  the  other  guardians,  of  hav- 
ing debased  the  coin,  having  encouraged  the  late  in- 
surrections, having  exercised  undue  constraint  on 
the  King,  and  so  forth.  He  was  sent  to  the  Tower 
where  he  endured  his  sufferings  with  patience  and 
dignity.  He  was  afterwards  released  for  a  season, 
but  was  again  arrested,  and  was  beheaded  Jan.  22, 
1552.  The  fall  of  Somerset  and  the  rise  of  War- 
wick to  power  caused  alarm  among  the  Protestants 
and  exultation  among  the  Roman  party,  but  their 
expectations  were  not  realized. 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

THE  FIRST  ENGLISH  ORDINAL. 

HE  first  Prayer  Book  had  come  out  in  the 
month  of  March,  1549,  with  the  title  "  The 
Book  of  the  Common  Prayer  and  admin- 
istration of  the  Sacraments,  and  other 
rites  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church,  after  the  use  of 
the  Church  of  England."  Besides  a  Preface  and  a 
calendar  it  contained  the  "order  for  Matins  and 
Evensong ; "  next,  the  Introits,  Collects,  Epistles 
and  Gospels,  with  proper  Psalms  and  Lessons  for 
diverse  feasts  and  days ;  then  the  service  for  **  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord  and  Holy  Communion,  com- 
monly called  the  Mass ;"  after  that  services  for  Bap- 
tism, both  public  and  private ;  for  Confirmation,  pre- 
ceded by  a  Catechism,  substantially  the  same  as  the 
present  catechism,  down  to  the  end  of  the  answer  on 
the  Lord's  Prayer.  Then  a  Marriage  Service,  scarcely 
altered  since  then ;  a  service  "  of  Visitation  of  the 
sick,  and  communion  of  the  same;"  of  Burial;  the 
"  Purification  of  Women ;  "  service  for  Ash  Wednes- 
day, the  same  as  at  present.  After  this  came  a  sec- 
tion "of  ceremonies,  why  some  be  abolished  and 
some  retained ; "  and  "  certain  notes  for  the  more 
plain  explication  and  decent  ministration  of  things 
contained  in  this  book."  Only  one  of  these  notes 
need  here  be  referred  to,  and  this  as  confirming  the 
view  already  given  in  regard  to  the  omission  of  rubri- 

147 


148  The  AiKjUcan  Reformation. 

cal  directions,  some  of  which  have  been  restored.  "As 
touching,  kneeling,  crossing,  holding  up  of  hands, 
knocking  upon  tiie  breast,  and  other  gestures :  they 
may  be  used  or  left,  as  every  man's  devotion  serveth, 
without  blame." 

There  was  no  service  contained  in  this  book  for 
ordinations  and  consecrations ;  but  it  was  from  the 
first  intended  to  be  added ;  and  it  was  drawn  up  by 
the  same  commission,  and  was  published  February 
2,  1550.  This  service  remains  substantially  the 
same,  the  delivery  of  the  paten  and  chalice  being 
omitted  in  1552,  and  certain  additions  made  in 
1G62. 

Much  controversy  has  arisen  in  regard  to  the  sig- 
nificance of  this  ordinal,  its  origin,  intention,  and 
contents.  The  reformers  have  been  blamed  for  not 
following  more  closely  the  ancient  models  and  for 
having  allowed  Martin  Bucer  to  destroy  the  Catho- 
lic character  of  the  service.  A  few  words,  in  the 
simple  interest  of  historical  truth,  may  be  devoted  to 
this  subject. 

In  regard  to  the  connection  between  the  new  or- 
dinal and  the  older  Latin  services,  the  reformers 
took  precisely  the  same  course  which  they  had 
adopted  in  drawing  up  the  other  services.  Instead 
of  being  charge.ible  with  neglecting  the  ancient 
methods  and  forms,  they  took  the  greatest  pains  to 
retain  all  that  belonged  to  Christian  antiquity,  and 
removed  only  those  parts  which  were  of  compara- 
tively modern  origin,  and  which  they  regarded  as 
unnecessary  or  superstitious. 

In  regard  to  the  existii'g  Roman  or  Sarum  Pontifi- 


The  Ordinal  149 


cal,  as  has  been  pointed  out,*  it  would  have  been  ex- 
tremely difficult  and  inconvenient  to  have  merely 
translated  this  document,  even  with  the  necessary 
changes  and  omissions.  It  had  not  the  charm  of  an- 
tiquity. It  had  been  put  together  at  different  times, 
and  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  its  parts  incoherent 
and  inconsistent.  For  example,  according  to  primi- 
tive usage,  the  first  part  of  the  present  service  for 
the  ordination  of  priests,  including  the  silent  laying 
on  of  hands  and  the  Prayer,  Vere  dignum^  was  suffi- 
cient to  make  a  priest.  But  this  is  not  recognized 
in  the  rubrics  which  call  the  candidates  ordinandi 
down  to  the  point  at  which  the  delivery  of  the  paten 
and  chalice  {porrectio  inBtrumentorum)  takes  place. 
But  this  is  not  all.  If  there  is  one  passage  in  tho 
New  Testament  which  may  be  regarded  as  most  sig- 
nificant of  the  commission  given  by  our  Lord  to  His 
ministers  it  is  that  contained  in  St.  John  XX.  22,  23. 
But  this  passage  does  not  occur  in  the  Latin  Service 
until  long  after  the  ordinand  has  been  recognized  as 
a  priest.  The  reformers  evidently  had  no  mind  to 
sink  the  sacerdotal  character  of  the  clergy,  as  they 
have  often  been  charged  with  doing ;  but  whatever 
their  mind  on  this  subject  may  have  been,  they 
chose  the  only  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus  which  they 
could  find,  conferring  the  full  extent  of  the  minister- 
ial commission.  They  stood  in  the  first  ordinal,  as 
they  do  now,  the  words  in  brackets  having  been 
added  in  1662:  "Receive  the  Holy  Ghost  [for  the 
office  and  work  of  a  Priest  in  the  Church  of  God, 
now  committed  unto  thee  by  the  imposition  of  our 
>  Church  Qoarterly  Review,  April  1897. 


150  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

hands].  Whose  sins  thou  dost  forgive,  they  are  for- 
given ;  and  whose  sins  thou  dost  retain  they  are  re- 
tained. And  be  thou  a  faithful  dispenser  of  the 
Word  of  God,  and  of  His  Holy  Sacrament^  ;  in  the 
Name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the 
Holy  Ghost.  Amen."  In  regard  to  the  portions 
added,  here  and  in  the  consecration  of  bishops,  there 
was  no  intention  of  supplying  any  defect  which  was 
supposed  to  exist  in  regard  to  the  designation  of  the 
orders :  the  additions  were  rather  pointed  against 
the  Puritans. 

Taking  a  simple  historical  view  of  what  took 
place  in  the  composition  of  this  ordinal  it  is  difficult 
to  understand  the  attacks  which  Roman  controver- 
sialists have  made  upon  it.  One  of  them  has  gone 
so  far  as  to  say  that  Cranmer  "sent  for  Bucer,  a 
Lutheran,  to  come  over  to  England  and  draw  up  a 
rite  for  making  Gospel  Ministers,  such  as  he  had 
drawn  up  for  the  German  Lutherans,  which  was 
practically  accepted."  As  simple  matter-of-fact, 
nearly  every  proposition  here  is  a  misstatement. 
Bucer  was  brought  over  by  Cranmer,  to  escape  the 
persecution  of  the  Lutherans  and  Reformed,  which 
had  broken  out  on  the  Continent.  He  was  appointed 
professor  at  Cambridge,  but  there  is  no  reason  to 
think  that  he  had  any  special  influence  in  the  draw- 
ing up  of  the  English  formularies.  As  regards  the 
ordinal,  we  are  in  possession  of  a  Latin  form  of 
Bucer's  which  may  have  been  intended  as  a  model 
for  the  English  Service,  but  which  di£Pers  so  widely 
from  it  as  to  show  that  the  English  reformers  in  no 
way  intended  to  be  guided  by  Bucer.    It  was  not 


jL 


-.,•  ,)~   ^-■ir'  T* 


Bucer'a  Influence. 


151 


practically  accepted  ;  and  as  regards  the  making  of 
Gospel  miiiisters,  we  should  be  much  surprised  if 
any  Puritan  should  select  the  particular  form  for  the 
ordination  of  priests  adopted  in  the  English  ordinal, 
although  he  might  submit  to  the  use  of  it,  after  it 
had  been  chosen. 

Perhaps  we  should  notice  one  argument  employed 
against  the  validity  of  the  English  ordinal,  if  it  were 
only  for  its  naivete.  It  has  been  contended  that  the 
Act  is  vitiated  by  the  omission  of  the  porrectlo  instru' 
mentorum.  In  the  first  ordinal,  it  was  said,  "  The 
Bishop  shall  deliver  to  every  one  of  them,  the  Bible  in 
the  one  hand,  and  the  chalice  or  cup  with  the  bread, 
in  the  other  hand";  but  without  the  words  used 
in  the  Latin  ordinal:  "Receive  power  to  offer  sacri- 
fice to  God,  and  to  celebrate  Mass  for  the  living  and 
the  dead."  In  the  second  ordinal  of  1552  there  was 
no  delivery  of  vessels  at  all.  In  the  judgment  of  the 
reformers  the  sacrificial  aspect  of  the  Holy  Euchar- 
ist had  been  made  too  prominent :  moreover  this  was 
not  the  only  Sacrament  which  priests  were  to  cele- 
brate. To  the  accusation  that  the  ordination  is  thus 
rendered  invalid  the  Anglican  replies,  it  is  impossible 
that  the  omission  of  the  delivery  of  the  vessels  or  of 
the  accompanying  words  should  render  the  ordina- 
tion invalid,  seeing  that  no  such  ceremony  was 
known  in  tjiie  Roman  Church  for  at  least  nine  hun- 
dred ye^rfC  What  is  the  answer  to  this?  The  an- 
swer/fnvolves  such  a  complete  begging  of  the  ques- 
tii?n  that  it  demands  some  degree  of  consideration  to 
^hich  it  is  essentially  not  entitled.  The  answer  is 
this :  That  a  local  or  national  Church  has  no  right 


152  The  Anfjlican  Reformation. 

to  omit  ceremonies  even  of  modern  introduction, 
which  have  been  sanctioned  by  the  universal  Church. 
We  do  not  reply  to  this  merely,  that  these  ceremon- 
ies are  not  universal,  that  they  are  unknown  in  vari- 
ous branches  of  the  Eastern  Church ;  but  further,  that 
this  objection  strikes  at  the  very  principle  of  the 
English  Reformation.  If  that  cannot  be  defended, 
it  would  be  mere  trifling  to  discuss  its  application  to 
such  a  detail  as  that  which  we  are  now  considering. 

The  principle  of  the  English  Reformation  was  not 
a  claim  to  return  to  the  mere  letter  of  the  Scriptures ; 
but  to  the  institutions  of  the  first  ages  of  the  Church 
and  to  the  Word  of  God  as  interpreted  by  the  early 
Fathers.  As  we  understand  this  principle,  it  was  not 
intended  to  stereotype  the  teaching  of  the  Church 
at  a  particular  moment,  in  such  a  sense  that  no  sub- 
sequent development  of  that  doctrine  should  be  per- 
mitted. But  it  was  intended  to  reject  all  later 
mediaeval  accretions  which  were  inconsistent  with 
primitive  teaching,  and  of  which  no  germ  could  be 
found  in  the  first  days  of  the  Church.  It  was  on 
this  ground  that  Anglicans  rejected  the  Supremacy, 
not  the  Primacy,  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  Invocation 
of  Saints,  and  the  comparatively  modern  doctrine  of 
Transubstantiation.  If  this  position  can  be  theolog- 
ically overthrown,  it  is  for  the  adherents  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  to  do  so :  it  is  quite  absurd,  in  a 
controversy  over  a  reformed  service,  to  assume  the 
Roman  position  as  a  major  premise  in  the  argument. 

The  intention  of  the  compilers  of  the  first  English 
ordinal  is  perfectly  clear.  They  believed  that  the 
three  orders  were  of  apostolic  origin  :  in  the  Preface 


The  Three  Orders.  153 

to  the  ordinal  they  say :  "  It  is  evident  unto  all  men, 
diligently  reading  Holy  Scripture  and  ancient  authors, 
that  from  the  Apostles'  tin>e  there  hath  been  these 
orders  of  Ministers  in  Christ's  Church,  Bishops, 
Priests,  and  Deacons."  They  intended,  therefore,  by 
means  of  these  services,  to  make  Bishops,  Priests, 
and  Deacons;  and  they  intended  that  they  should 
be  made  in  the  primitive  manner,  "  by  public  prayer 
with  imposition  of  hands."  In  these  services  they 
ordered  all  to  be  done  which  had  been  done  in  the 
early  liturgies  of  the  Church,  removing  from  the 
later  offices  only  such  parts  as  were  inconsistent,  re- 
dundant or  superstitious.  As  regards  the  designa- 
tion to  the  particular  office,  in  the  ordering  of 
Priests,  the  order  is  named  in  the  exhortation  to  the 
people,  and  the  words  accompanying  the  laying  on 
of  hands  could  apply  only  to  the  Priesthood.  In 
the  Consecration  of  a  Bishop,  not  only  is  the  ordi- 
nand  presented  as  one  who  is  "to  be  Consecrated 
Bishop,"  but  he  also  takes  the  oath  to  the  Archbishop 
as  one  "  chosen  Bishop  of  the  Church ; "  and,  after 
the  Consecration,  the  pastoral  staff  is,  by  the  Arch- 
bishop, put  into  his  hands. 

Of  the  twelve  who  took  part  in  the  drawing  up 
of  the  ordinal  only  one.  Heath,  Bishop  of  Worcester, 
refused  his  consent  to  the  office ;  nor  could  the 
Council  persuade  him  to  accept  it.  He  was  therefore 
committed  to  the  Fleet  because  *'he  obstinately 
denied  to  subscribe  the  book  for  the  making  of 
Bishops  and  Priests."  Says  Burnet:  "He  had 
hitherto  opposed  everything  done  toward  reforma- 
tion in  Parliament,  though  he  had  given  an  entire 


154  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

obedience  to  it  when  it  was  enacted.  He  was  a  man 
of  a  gentle  temper  and  great  prudence,  that  under- 
stood affairs  of  state  better  than  matters  of  religion. 
But  now  it  was  resolved  to  rid  the  Church  of  those 
compilers  who  submitted  out  of  fear  or  interest  to 
dave  their  benefices ;  but  were  still  ready,  upon  any 
favorable  conjuncture,  to  return  back  to  the  old 
superstition."  Gardiner,  then  in  prison,  was  not 
quite  satisfied  with  the  ordinal  and  dislikeu  the 
omission  of  the  Unction ;  yet  he  was  willing  to 
accept  and  enforce  it,  so  that  he  must  have  regarded 
it  as,  at  least,  sufficient. 


,  y  ■,.•,..■, 


CHAPTER  XIV. 


FOREIGN    INFLUENCES    AND    THE    SECOND    PRATER 

BOOK. 

|T  soon  became  apparent  that  many  were 
not  satisfied  with  the  changes  which  had 
been  made  in  the  churches  and  the  serv- 
ices, and  that  an  attempt  would  be  made 
to  conform  the  Church  of  England  more  nearly  to 
the  model  of  continental  Protestantism.  It  would 
hardly  be  exact  to  say  that  hitherto  the  Reformation 
had  been  a  purely  English  work  without  any  influ- 
ence being  exerted  from  without ;  but  a  time  had 
come  when  those  influences  were  to  be  felt  more 
powerfully,  and  when  there  were  men  in  office  who 
sympathized  more  deeply  with  them. 

On  the  one  hand  there  was  a  feeling  in  England 
that  the  Protestant  nations  and  churches  should 
draw  more  closely  together  for  mutual  defenc^i,  es- 
pecially as  Roman  divines  were  uniting  at  the  Coun- 
cil of  Trent,  and  it  was  probablo  that  attempts 
would  be  made  to  enforce  the  decrees  of  the  Council. 
On  the  other  hand,  several  of  the  bishops  of  the  old 
learning  had  been  dispossessed,  and  their  places  taken 
by  men  who  were  prepared  to  advance  further  in  the 
path  of  reform.  Ridley,  Bishop  of  Rochester,  suc- 
ceeded Bonner  as  Bishop  of  London  (April,  1550)  ; 
Poynet  took  the  place  of  Gardiner  at  Winchester 
(February,  1551).    But  before  this  the  Earl  of  War- 

166 


156  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

wick,  now  supreme,  had  recomrnended  Hooper  for 
the  see  of  Gloucester,  as  being  of  opinions  congenial 
to  those  of  the  King  (July  3,  1650). 

Hooper  was  a  thoroughgoing  Protestant,  objecting 
to  the  remains  of  medisevalism  which  he  considered 
still  to  cleave  to  the  reformed  services  of  the  Church 
of  England.  He  had  been  a  Cistercian  monk  in  Eng- 
land until  the  dissoluticjn  of  the  religious  houses  on 
the  passing  of  the  Six  Articles.  He  had  gone  to  the 
continent  and  in  1547  to  Zurich,  where  he  lived  for 
two  years  with  BuUinger.  In  May,  1549,  he  had  re- 
turned to  England,  being  made  chaplain  first  to  the 
Duke  of  Somerset,  and  then  to  King  Edward.  He 
found  fault  with  various  features  in  the  Prayer  Book, 
which  he  said  was  "  to  be  borne  with  for  the  weak's 
sake  awhile."  But  on  one  point  he  was  obstinate. 
When  he  was  nominated  to  Gloucester,  he  refused 
to  wear  the  Episcopal  vestments  which  he  called  the 
"  Aaronic  habits."  Efforts  were  made  to  induce 
Cranmer  to  dispense  with  them  ;  but  the  Archbishop 
refused  to  break  the  law.  Bucer  and  Peter  Martyr 
tried  to  convince  Hooper  that  the  mere  wearing  of  a 
garment  was  no  infringement  of  Gospel  principles, 
but  in  vain.  Ridley  did  his  best  with  the  same  re- 
sult. Finally  he  was  committed  to  the  charge  of 
Cranmer ;  but  the  Archbishop  had  to  report  his  want 
of  success.  The  Council  then  applied  their  last  argu- 
ment by  sending  him  to  the  Fleet,  January  27,  1551. 
At  last  he  gave  way  (March  8)  and  was  consecrated. 
Hooper,  at  his  consecration,  also  took  the  oath  of 
supremacy  to  which  he  had  previously  objected  on 
grounds  which  are  not  quite  clear. 


»'^*  ~  I    * 


Destruction  of  Altars,  157 

Among  the  sometimes  questionable  proceedings  of 
this  period  there  are  few  which  seem  to  churclimeu 
of  the  present  day  so  offensive  as  the  wlioiesale  de- 
struction of  altars.  Prominent  among  tiie  icono- 
clasts was  Ridley,  who  had  been  chaplain  to  Cran- 
nier,  was  made  Bishop  of  Rochester,  and  soon  after- 
ward succeeded  to  London.  \Vhile  still  at  Roches- 
ter, he  had  begun  the  work ;  and,  when  he  went  to 
London  Hooper  expressed  his  hope  that  he  would 
destroy  the  "altars  of  Baal"  in  his  new  diocese. 
When  we  consider  how  much  has  been  done,  in  re- 
cent years,  with  general  consent,  to  replace  the  altars 
and  the  furniture  of  the  sanctuary  in  all  parts  of  the 
Anglican  Communion,  the  proceedings  of  Ridley  and 
his  fellow-workers  must  seem  wanton  and  unreasona- 
ble. But,  in  fact,  it  is  hardly  possible  for  anyone, 
in  these  times,  to  understand  tlie  feelings  of  the  re- 
formers on  these  subjects,  or  the  justification  which 
they  might  plead  for  them.  It  is  impossible  for 
us  to  deny  that  tlie  meaning  of  the  Holy  Euchar- 
ist had  been  greatly  perverted.  From  a  sacred  feast 
with  a  sacrificial  character,  like  the  peace  offering,  it 
had  been  turned  into  a  sacrifice,  generally  without 
participation  on  the  part  of  the  congregation ;  and 
the  offering  of  private  masses  had  become  a  me- 
chanical business  and  a  kind  of  trade,which  the  largest 
charity  could  hardly  regard  as  edifying  or  even  as 
tolerable.  Men  like  Cranmer  and  Ridley  and  Lati- 
mer were  bent  upon  putting  an  end  to  this  state  of 
things,  as  a  consequence  of  which  the  sacrificial 
character  of  the  Eucharist  is  but  just  recognized  in 
the  English  communion  service.     When,   however, 


158  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

they  found  that  the  new  Prayer  Book  had  not  pro- 
duced the  desired  effect,  and  that  many  of  the  clergy 
kept  alive  as  much  of  the  older  ritual  as  they  could 
connect  with  the  new  service,  and  "  counterfeited  the 
popish  Mass,"  it  was  no  great  wonder  that  more 
drastic  measures  should  be  taken. 

Some  progress  had  been  made  in  the  work  of 
demolition,  but  it  was  partial  and  incomplete.  Some 
priests  were  using  the  old  altars,  some  the  tables 
which  had  been  set  up  in  their  places.  Ridley,  in 
his  desire  for  "godly  unity,  "  gave  orders  for  the  re- 
moval of  the  altar,  the  reredos,  the  super-altar  and 
the  like,  and  required  "  the  Lord's  Board,  after  the 
form  of  an  honest  table,  decently  covered"  to  be  set 
up.  The  same  order  was  adopted  and  sent  out  by 
the  Council  to  all  the  bishops  (November,  1650). 
This  had  already  been  done  in  St.  Paul's  Cfithedral 
on  St.  Barnabas  day  of  this  year,  under  Ridley's 
superintendence — "the  wall  standing  then  by  the 
high  altar's  side  "  being  broken  down.  At  the  same 
time  the  tables  began  to  be  placed  in  what  was  re- 
garded as  the  most  convenient  position,  a  prepara- 
tion for  the  change  to  be  made  by  the  next  Prayer 
Book.  Bishop  Day  of  Chichester  refused  obedience 
and  was  sent  to  prison,  December  10,  1550;  and 
Tunstall,  now  of  Durham,  followed  him,  December 
20,  1551. 

Two  things  now  began  to  engage  the  attention  of 
the  English  Reformers — the  drawing  up  of  a  series  of 
"  Articles  of  Religion,"  and  the  revision  of  the  Prayer 
Book.  In  the  latter  work  Cranmer  had  the  assist- 
ance of  the  foreign  divines  who  had  taken  refuge  in 


Bucer's  Censtire.  169 


England,  chief  among  whom  were  Martin  Bucer  and 
Peter  Martyr,  already  mentioned.  Bucer  was  a 
man  of  great  moderation,  and  he  died  (February  28, 
1551)  before  the  second  Prayer  Book  was  published. 
What  influence  he  had  upon  its  composition  we  do 
not  know,  and  it  has  been  said  that  he  did  not  alto- 
gether approve  of  the  proposed  changes ;  but  his 
Cenaura^  published  less  than  two  months  before  his 
death,  showed  that  he  was  in  general  sympathy  with 
the  innovations. 

This  "  Censure  '*  of  Bucer  took  the  form  of  a  criti- 
cism of  the  first  book,  and  extended  to  twenty-eight 
chapters.  He  disapproves  of  the  use  of  tlie  choir  for 
divine  service,  as  involving  a  separation  of  the  Clergy 
from  the  Laity.  Of  the  Communion  Service  he  ap- 
proves, but  wishes  the  bread  to  be  made  thicker  and 
more  like  ordinary  bread.  He  objects  to  the  rubric 
which  left  certain  gestures  indifferent,  and  to  the 
presence  of  non-communicants.  He  objects  to  the 
vestments  as  having  been  abused,  and  to  the  practice 
of  putting  the  bread  into  the  mouth  of  the  communi- 
cant. He  also  objects  to  prayers  for  the  dead,  to 
the  mention  of  the  angels,  and  several  other  points 
in  the  first  Prayer  Book.  He  disapproves  of  the 
practice  of  having  a  second  celebration,  although  he 
admits  that  it  had  been  ait  ancient  custom  on  great 
festivals.  He  does  not  think  there  should  be  more 
communicants  at  Easter  and  Christmas  than  at  other 
times :  all  should  communicate  every  Sunday.  His 
remarks  on  the  other  services  are  in  the  same  direc- 
tion, but  of  less  importance. 

Peter   Martyr  had  been  in  England  before  the 


160  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

drawing  up  of  the  first  book;  but  it  does  not  appear 
thiit  he  had  any  hand  in  its  composition.  He  took 
part,  however,  in  the  criticism  of  the  book,  while  it 
was  under  revision  ;  but,  being  ignorant  of  English, 
he  had  to  do  so  by  means  of  a  Latin  translation. 
When  he  read  Bucer's  criticism,  he  signified  his 
agreement  with  it,  and  expressed  his  surprise  that 
Bucer  had  not  condemned  the  practice  of  carrying 
the  consecrated  elements  out  of  the  Church  to  sick 
persons  who  might  be  unable  to  attend. 

Another  influential  foreigner  was  John  Laski,  or 
h.  Lasco,  a  Polish  nobleman,  in  bishop's  orders,  who 
had  taken  refuge  in  England  in  1550,  and  had  be- 
come Superintendent  of  the  Congregations  of  foreign 
Protestants  in  London.  He  was  said  by  a  Protestant, 
writing  to  Bullinger,  to  have  roused  the  Archbishop 
*'  from  his  dangerous  lethargy "  into  which  he  had 
fallen  some  time  before.  However  this  may  have 
been,  there  grew  up  in  England  a  strong  desire  for  a 
revision  of  the  Prayer  Book  of  1549. 

Among  those  who  urged  on  the  work  was  the 
young  King  himself,  now  fourteen  years  of  age,  who 
declared  that  if  the  Clergy  would  not  remove  the  ob- 
jectionable passages,  he  would  pass  over  Convocation 
and  bring  the  matter  before  Parliament.  The  re- 
visors  of  the  Prayer  Book  are  therefore  not  entirely 
responsible  for  all  that  was  done,  except  for  their 
compliance  with  the  will  of  the  boy  King  which  in 
those  da3's  it  was  not  quite  safe  to  resist.  At  the 
same  time,  there  is  no  reason  to  suspect  that  Cran- 
mer  was  opposed  either  to  the  particular  changes 
which  were  now  made  or  to  the  tendencies  which 


Cranmer  on  the  Eucharist.  161 

they  indicated.  It  is  not  quite  accurate  to  say  that 
Cranmer  took  his  theological  views  from  the  circum- 
stances in  which  he  found  himself.  In  the  early 
days  of  the  Keformation  he  had  held  the  Uomau 
doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  and  had  joined  in 
punishing  those  who  had  rejected  it.  But  he  had 
certainly  advanced  to  the  Lutheran  position  in  the 
reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  when  there  was  some  danger 
in  holding  such  views. 

And  now  he  seems  to  have  entered  upon  a  new 
phase  of  opinion,  closely  resembling  that  of  the  Swiss 
reformers;  to  which  he  was  influenced  partly  by  the 
foreign  divines,  partly  by  Ridley,  and  partly  by  his 
antagonism  to  the  party  who  were  trying  to  nullify 
the  reforming  work  of  the  first  Prayer  Book.  The 
result  of  this  process  is  seen  in  his  treatise,  published 
in  1550,  entitled  the  "Defence  of  the  True  and 
Catholic  Doctrine  of  the  Sacrament  of  the  Body  and 
Blood  of  our  Saviour  Christ."  Without  entering 
upon  the  discussion  of  a  subject  which  has  furnished 
controversy  for  centuries,  we  may  point  out  the  im- 
jjortance  of  this  treatise  in  relation  to  the  English 
Reformation. 

In  the  first  place,  then,  Cranmer  insisted  upon  the 
grace  of  the  Sacrament,  regarding  the  elements  as 
the  instruments  by  which  this  grace  was  conveyed 
to  the  worthy  receiver.  In  this  respect  he  differed 
both  from  those  who  regarded  the  ordinance  as  a 
mere  commemoration,  and  from  those  who  considered 
it  to  be  a  merely  external  means  for  the  stirring  up  of 
faith  and  gratitude.  On  the  negative  side,  he  pro- 
ceeded to  condemn  four  errors  of  Romans  and  Luth- 
K 


162  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

erans:  Transubstantiiation,  the  Corporal  presence, 
the  eating  and  drhiking  of  Christ  by  the  wicked,  and 
the  expiatory  sacrifice  of  the  Mass.  Each  of  these 
topics  is  considered  in  a  separate  book. 

Gardiner  was  in  prison,  still  nominally  and  legally 
Bishop  of  Winchester,  and  about  this  time  was  called 
upon  to  give  his  opinion  on  the  new  Prayer  Book 
and  ordinal.  In  answering  this  demand,  he  man- 
aged to  introduce  his  answer  to  Cranmer's  treatise, 
and  got  his  tract  printed  in  France,  January,  1551. 
It  must  be  admitted  that  Cranmer  treated  his  adver- 
sary with  perfect  fairness,  since  he  reprinted  his  own 
original  treatise  and  Gardiner's  answer  word  for 
word ;  and  then  added  his  own  rejoinder.  Ho  con- 
templated a  more  complete  work,  but  this  was  inter- 
rupted by  the  death  of  King  Edward. 

The  proposed  revision  of  the  Prayer  Book  was 
' ^  brought  before  Convocation  by  Cranmer  in  1550 ; 
but  nothing  seems  to  have  been  do^ided  upon ;  and 
we  can  only  conjecture  that  the  work,  when  it  was 
completed,  was  sanctioned  by  Convocation.  It  was 
finally  authorized  by  the  second  Act  of  Uniformity, 
(5  and  6  Edward  VI.  C.  1),  January,  1552 ;  and  it 
may  be  as  well  to  pay  some  attention  to  this  Act  be- 
fore noting  the  changes  made  in  tlic  book,  since  its 
contents  are  of  some  importance  in  regard  to  those 
changes  and  the  liberty  of  opinion  in  matters  of 
doctrine  allowed  to  ministers  of  the  English  Church. 

It  is  possible  for  us,  at  this  time  of  day,  to  con- 
sider these  subjects  with  perfect  calmness  and  free- 
dom from  prejudice,  inasmuch  as  the  Prayer  Book 
now  in   use   differs  considerably  from   the   second 


Siynificance  of  Second  Booh,  163 

Prayer  Book,  and  particularly  in  those  points  with 
regard  to  which  controversy  has  chiefly  arisen.  So 
much  being  premised  we  liave  no  hesitation  in  say- 
ing, first,  that  it  was  intended,  under  the  second 
book,  to  tolerate  all  the  opinions,  if  not  all  the 
practices  sanctioned  by  the  first  book ;  but  also,  that 
it  was  intended  to  discountenance  some  of  them. 
The  first  of  these  appears  from  the  Act  of  Uniform- 
ity, the  second  from  the  contents  of  the  services. 

This  second  Act  of  Uniformity  declared  that  the 
first  book  contained  nothing  but  "  what  was  agree- 
able to  the  word  of  God  and  the  primitive  Church ; " 
and  that  such  doubts  as  had  arisen  in  connection 
with  its  contents  and  requirements  had  arisen  rather 
from  "  curiosity  and  misunderstanding  than  of  any 
other  worthy  cause."  In  order  to  do  away  with 
these  difficulties,  certain  alterations  had  been  made, 
and  the  book  thus  altered  was  henceforth  to  be 
used.  It  is  possible  that,  when  the  Act  was  drawn 
up,  the  amount  of  the  changes  made  was  imperfectly 
known,  as  the  book  was  not  published  until  nine 
months  afterwards.  However  this  may  be,  the  clergy 
were  required  to  use  it  and  the  Laity  were  required 
under  penalties  to  be  present  at  the  public  services. 
Moreover  the  requirement  of  the  clerical  use  of  the 
book  was  made  more  distinct  and  explicit. 

In  the  Preface  to  the  first  book,  in  regard  to 
Matins  and  Evensong  it  had  been  said :  "  Neither 
that  any  man  shall  be  bound  to  the  saying  of  them, 
but  such  as,  from  time  to  time,  in  Cathedral  and  Col- 
legiate Churches,  Parish  Churches,  and  Chapels  to 
the  same  annexed,  shall  serve  the  Congregation." 


164  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

In  the  second  book,  the  Preface  is  made  to  read, 
nearly  as  it  now  stands,  as  follows,  the  italics  show- 
ing the  portions  in  the  Preface  to  the  second  edition 
now  altered  or  omitted,  the  portions  in  brackets  be- 
ing such  as  we  now  have  them.  **  And  all  priests 
and  deacons  shall  he  hound  [are]  to  say  daily  the 
Morning  and  Evening  Prayer  either  privately  or 
openly,  except  they  he  letted  hy  preaching^  studying  of 
divinity  [not  being  let  by  sickness]  or  by  some  other 
urgent  cause."  "And  the  Curate  that  ministereth 
in  every  Parish  Church  or  Chapel,  being  at  home, 
and  not  being  otherwise  reasonably  letted  [hindered], 
shall  say  the  same  in  the  Parish  Church  or  Chapel 
where  he  ministereth,  and  shall  toll  a  hell  there  to 
[cause  a  bell  to  be  tolled  thereunto],  a  convenient 
time  before  he  begin,  that  such  as  he  disposed  [the 
people]  may  come  to  hear  God's  word  and  to  pray 
with  him." 

Here  it  is  quite  clear  that  the  same  general  pur- 
pose which  had  animated  the  compilers  of  the  first 
book  was  present  at  the  drawing  up  of  the  second. 
Their  design  was  that  people  should  attend  and  take 
j)art  in  the  ordinary  cervices  of  the  Church,  and  that 
instead  of  the  mere  assisting  at  masses,  which  often 
did  not  mean  hearing  and  joining  in  those  services, 
the  people  should  hear  the  Word  of  God  read,  should 
receive  instruction  in  Divine  truth,  and  should  take 
an  intelligent  part  in  the  prayers  offered  in  the  public 
services.  We  can  see  also,  that,  in  this  second  book, 
the  hortatory  element  was  made  more  prominent. 

The  changes  made  in  Morning  and  Evening 
Prayer  were  of  no  special  significance,  except  in  the 


Changes  in  Second  Prayer  Booh,  165 

direction  mentioned,  and  perhaps  in  the  tendency  to 
niiuimize  the  distance  between  Clergy  and  Laity. 
The  first  Prayer  r>ook  hud  begun  :  "The  Priest  be- 
ing in  the  Choir  bhall  begin  with  a  loud  voice  tho 
Lord's  Prayer,  called  the  Pater  Noster.**  Even  here 
there  is  a  departure  from  tho  Latin  use,  in  which 
the  Lord's  Prayer  had  been  said  silently  down  to  the 
phrase,  aed  libera  nos  a  malo  (but  deliver  us  from 
evil),  which  was  spoken  aloud.  But  the  changes  in 
the  second  book  were  more  serious.  It  is  the  **  Min- 
ister" and  not  the  "  Priest "  who  is  to  say  the  serv- 
ice, and  not  necessarily  in  the  Choir,  but  *'  in  such 
place  of  the  Church,  Chapel,  or  Chancel,  and  the 
minister  shall  so  turn  him  as  the  people  may  best 
hear."  However  this  is  added,  **and  the  chancels 
shall  remain  as  they  have  done  in  times  past.'* 

The  first  book  had  begun  with  the  Lord's  Prayer. 
To  the  Morning  Service,  but  not  yet  to  Evensong,  in 
the  second  book  there  were  prefixed  the  sentences, 
exhortation,  confession,  and  absolution,  almost  iden- 
tical with  those  now  used,  except  that  the  spelling  is 
modernized  and  some  slight  archaisms  have  been 
altered.  The  next  change  is  the  addition  of  the 
Jubilate^  as  an  alternative  for  the  Benedictus.  Then 
two  or  three  slight  changes  are  made  in  the  saying  of 
the  Creed,  Lord's  Prayer,  and  Versicles.  At  Even- 
ing Prayer  the  Cantate  is  introduced  as  an  alternative 
to  the  Mafjnificaty  and  the  Beua  misereatur  to  the 
Nunc  Bimittis.  The  Litany  is  placed  after  the 
Athanasian  Creed. 

In  regard  to  the  Litany,  we  may  remark  that  we 
still  find  in  this  book  the  suffrage  for  which  we  are 


166  The  Anylican  Reformation. 

indebted  to  the  period  of  Henry  VIII. :  "  From  all 
sedition  and  privy  conspiracy,  from  the  tyranny  of  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  and  all  his  detestable  enormities^  from 
nil  false  doctrine,"  etc.  Before  leaving  this  part  of 
the  subject  it  may  be  proper  to  remark  that  the  exhor- 
tations introduced  here  and  elsewhere,  which  to  us 
may  seem  tedious,  wearisome,  and  unnecessary,  were 
probably  of  the  highest  utility  when  first  introduced, 
having  regard  to  the  general  ignorance  of  the  people 
and  the  inability  of  most  of  them  to  read. 

Most  of  the  services  were  altered  on  the  same 
principles.  Thus,  in  the  service  for  public  baptism, 
apart  from  sundry  rearrangements  of  the  parts,  the 
exorcism  'Contained  in  the  earlier  service  ("  I  com- 
mand thee,  unclean  spirit,  in  the  Name  of  tiie  Father 
and  of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  that  thou 
come  out  and  depart  from  these  infants,  etc.")  is 
omitted.  So  the  manner  of  baptism  is  changed.  In 
the  first  book  the  priest  was  directed  to  name  the 
child  and  "  dip  it  in  the  water  tlnice  j  first  dipping 
the  right  side;  second  the  leftside;  the  third  time 
dipping  the  face  toward  the  front."  In  the  sec- 
ond book  he  was  merely  to  "dip  it  in  the  water." 
In  both  books  it  is  to  be  "discreetly  and  warily 
done  ; "  and  "  if  the  child  be  weak,  it  shall  suffice 
to  pour  water  upcn  it."  In  the  first  book  after  the 
baptism  it  is  ordered  :  "  Then  the  godfathers  and 
godmothers  shall  take  and  lay  their  hands  upon  the 
child,  and  the  minister  shall  put  upon  him  his  white 
vesture,  commonly  called  the  chrisora;  and  say; 
*Take  this  white  vesture  for  a  token  of  the  innocence, 
etc.*    All  this  is  omitted  in  the  second  book.    The 


Occasional  Services,  167 

priest  was  further  directed  tr  "anoint  the  infant 
upon  the  head."  This  was  ai  emitted.  But  the 
signing  witli  the  cross  which,  in  the  first  book,  had 
occurred  at  an  earlier  place,  was  now  introduced 
here.  One  remarkable  addition  to  the  second  book 
is  the  prayer  of  thanksgiving  "  that  it  hath  pleased 
tliee  to  regenerate  this  infant  with  Thy  Holy 
Spirit ; "  showing  clearly  that  the  Puritans  of  that 
period  had  not  introduced  the  confusion,  so  com- 
mon soon  afterward,  between  regeneration  and  con- 
version. 

In  the  Confirmation  Service  the  Catechism  still 
stood  as  the  introduction.  The  principal  difference 
in  the  service  was  the  omission  of  the  crossing  by 
the  Bishop  of  the  forehead  of  the  candidate,  before 
the  laying  on  of  hands,  which  was  ordered  in  the 
first  book. 

In  the  Form  of  the  Solemnization  of  Matrimony 
at  the  giving  of  the  ring,  the  words  ran  thus  in  the 
first  book  :  "  With  this  ring  I  thee  wed ;  [This  gold 
and  silver  I  thee  give] ;  with  my  body  I  thee  worship; 
and  with  all  my  worldly  goods  I  thee  endow.'*  The 
clause  in  brackets  was  omitted  in  the  second  book, 
togetlier  with  the  rubrical  direction  (after  the  word 
*'  ring ")  :  "  and  other  tokens  of  spousage,  as  gold 
or  silver."  Several  slight  changes  are  made  in  the 
prayers.  For  example,  in  the  Collect  beginning, 
"O  God  of  Abraham,"  after  the  words  "bless  them," 
there  stood:  "As  thou  diddest  send  thy  Angel 
Raphael  to  Tobie  and  Sara,  the  daughter  of  Raguel 
to  their  great  comfort."  This  disappears  in  the  sec- 
ond book.    One  point  of  some  interest  may  be  noted. 


168  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

In  the  first  book  it  was  ordered,  after  the  marriage 
and  the  first  blessing,  "  Then  shall  they  go  into  the 
Choir,"  clearly  meaning  the  married  couple.  In  the 
second  book,  it  stands :  "  Then  the  ministers  or 
clerks,  going  to  the  Lord's  table,"  leaving  the  posi- 
tion of  the  married  couple  undetermined. 

In  regard  to  the  visitation  of  the  sick,  it  may  seem 
surprising  that  so  little  change  was  made,  almost  the 
only  difference  between  the  services  being  the  omis- 
sion of  this  rubric :  "  If  the  sick  person  desire  to  be 
anointed,  then  shall  the  priest  anoint  him  upon  the 
forehead  or  breast  only,  making  the  sign  of  the 
cross."  In  regard,  however,  to  the  strong  state- 
ment of  absolution,  it  must  be  remembered  that  the 
early  Puritans  held  very  decided  opinions  as  to  the 
ministerial  powci  of  the  Keys,  and  binding  and 
loosing. 

In  the  order  of  the  Burial  of  the  Dead,  there  is 
a  good  deal  changed  in  the  arrangement  of  the  serv- 
ice, and  the  "  Celebration  of  the  Holy  Communion, 
with  its  Collect  (embodied  however  in  the  new  serv- 
ice). Epistle,  and  Gospel»  is  omitted  in  the  second 
book ;  but  the  onl}'  change  of  much  significance  is 
the  omission,  from  the  prayer  of  thanksgiving,  of 
the  petition  :  "  Grant,  we  beseech  Tiiee,  that  at  the 
day  of  judgment,  his  soul  and  all  the  souls  of  Thy 
elect,  departed  out  of  this  life,  may  with  us,  and  we 
with  them,  fully  receive  Thy  promih^s,  and  be  made 
perfect  together,  through  the  glorious  resurrection 
of  Thy  Son,  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." 

It  was,  however,  in  the  Communion  Service,  as 
we  might  expect,  that  the  most  serious  changes  were 


Communion  Service.  169 

made.  And  here  it  is  necessary  to  be  very  watchful 
over  our  judgments  since  it  is  not  merely  our  doctri- 
nal predilections,  but  our  liturgical  sense,  which 
must  be  gratified  or  offended.  As  before,  wc  restrict 
ourselves  to  the  notice  of  those  changes  which  seem 
to  have  a  doctrinal  meaning.  On  one  point  there 
may  perhaps  be  some  doubt.  Whether  we  are  to 
regard  the  breaking  of  the  "  Canon  of  *he  Mass  " 
into  three  parts — the  Prayer  for  the  Church  Militant, 
the  Prayer  of  Consecration,  and  the  first  of  the  two 
Collects  after  the  second  Lord's  Prayer — as  an  at- 
tempt to  lessen  the  importance  of  the  celebration 
may  be  doubted.  On  the  one  hand,  it  may  have 
been  intended  to  give  the  congregation  a  firmer  hold 
on  the  meaning  of  the  different  parts  of  the  service  ; 
on  the  other  hand,  the  compilers  may  have  desired 
that  those  who  departed  without  receiving  the  Sac- 
rament might  yet  join  in  some  of  the  prayers.  The 
reason  for  the  dislocation  of  the  Confession,  Absolu- 
tion, Comfortable  words,  and  putting  these  parts  of 
the  service  before  the  Prefaces,  instead  of  after  the 
Consecration,  is  not  apparent.  On  other  points, 
however,  the  reason  of  the  cl^anges  is  tolerably 
plain. 

Premising  that  we  have  here  hardly  any  concern 
with  the  origin  of  our  services  or  their  relation  to  the 
ancient  Liturgies  of  the  Church,  but  simply  with 
their  contents  as  illustrating  the  progress  of  the 
English  Reformation,  we  proceed  to  note  the  changes 
in  the  Communion  Service. 

To  begin  with  the  Heading  of  the  Service.  In  the 
fir;t  book  it  was:   "The  Supper  of  the  Lord  and  the 


170  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Holy  Communion,  commonly  called  the  Mass."  In 
tlie  second  it  was :  "  The  order  for  the  Adminis- 
tration of  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  Holy  Comnninion." 
But  for  its  connection  with  other  changes,  the 
omission  of  the  word  "Mass"  need  have  meant 
little.  The  word  itself  is  of  doubtful  origin;  but  it 
had  got  so  thoroughly  associated  with  the  sacrificial 
aspect  of  the  Eucharist  that  the  reformers  resolved 
to  remove  it. 

It  is  probable  that  the  alterations  in  tlie  initiatory 
rubrics  were  determined  by  the  same  considerations. 
For  some  time  there  had  been  troubles,  as  in  tho 
case  of  Hooper,  about  the  vestments.  The  providing 
of  a  8])ecial  garment  for  the  Service  of  the  Altar  in- 
vested that  service  with  a  peculiar  dignity ;  and 
-although  tlie  chasuble  itself  was  simpl}'^  an  adapta- 
tion of  an  out-ofdoor  garment  worn  in  Rome,  yet  it 
had  come  to  be  considered"  as  the  vestment  proper 
for  the  offerer  of  the  sacrifice ;  and  for  these  reasons 
it  had  been  objected  to.  Hence  tho  change  in  the 
second  book.  In  tho  earlier  one  it  hfid  been  or- 
dered that  "the  Priest  that  shall  execute  tho  holy 
ministry  [of  the  Communion]  shall  put  upon  him  tho 
vesture  appointed  for  that  ministration,  that  is  to 
say :  a  white  alb  plain  with  a  vestment  or  cope." 
And  it  was  further  ordered  that  tlie  assistants  should 
wear  "albs  with  tunicles."  All  this  disappears  in 
the  second  book,  and  a  rubric  is  inserted  at  the  be- 
ginning of  Morning  Prayer,  ordering  "that  the 
minister  at  the  time  of  the  Communion  and  all 
other  times  in  his  ministration,  shall  use  neither 
alb,  vestment,  nor  cope;  but,  being  Archbishop  or 


Second  Communion  Office.  171 

Bishop,  he  shall  have  and  wear  a  rochet;  and  being 
a  priest  or  deacon,  he  shall  have  and  wear  a  surplice 
oi.ly."  The  obvious  reason  for  its  appearing  at  tlie 
beginning  of  the  book  was  that  the  garment  was  to 
be  the  same  at  all  the  services. 

There  is  also  a  cliange  in  the  position  of  the  Holy 
Table.  Up  to  this  time  it  had  stood  against  the 
eastern  wall  of  the  Church,  generally  with  a  reredos 
behind  it.  For  reasons  already  mentioned,  altars  and 
tlicir  adjuncts  had  been  broken  down;  and  now  it  is 
ordered  that  the  table  at  Communion  time  having 
"  a  fuif  white  linen  cloth  upon  it,  shall  stand  in  the 
body  of  the  Church,  or  in  tlie  Chancel,  where  Morn- 
ing Prayer  and  Evening  Prayer  be  appointed  to  be 
said."  Here  the  same  disposition  is  manifested  to  re- 
duce the  Holy  Communion  to  the  level  of  the  otlier 
services.  It  is  not  said,  in  so  many  words,  that  the 
table  shall  stand  East  and  West,  but  this  is  implied 
in  the  instructions  to  the  minister. 

In  the  first  book  the  order  was:  "The  Priest 
standing  before  the  *Midde8*  of  the  Altar,  shall  say 
the  Lord's  Prayer,  etc."  Under  the  influences 
already  noted  the  word  ''altar"  disappears  from  the 
English  Service  book,  and  does  not  return,  although 
it  occurs  in  the  Coronation  Service ;  and  the  table 
with  a  fair  white  linen  cloth  takes  its  place.  The 
direction  now  runs:  "And  the  Priest,  st"  aing  at 
tlie  North  Side  of  the  table,  shall  say  .o  Lord's 
Prayer,  etc."  All  that  need  be  said  on  this  subject 
at  present  is,  that  the  Priest  was  ordered  to  stand  at 
precisely  the  same  part  of  the  table  as  he  had  done 
when  it  stood  North  and  South  against  the  eastern 


172  Tlie  Anylican  Reformation. 

wall.  He  stood  at  the  side  which  had  been  the 
West,  and  was  now  the  North  Side  of  the  table. 
The  bearing  of  this  rubric  will  be  seen  on  contro- 
versies long  after  this  period. 

The  next  change  we  note  is  the  introduction  of 
the  Ten  Commandments,  followed  by  a  prayer  for 
mercy  and  grace,  in  the  place  hitherto  occupied  by 
the  Lesser  Litany.  This  is  one  of  the  features  of  the 
revised  service  which  has  been  objected  to  and  it 
does  seem  rather  an  odd  place  for  the  Command- 
ments to  occupy.  Yet  the  principle  had  not  been 
entirely  without  recognition  in  the  Latin  services; 
and  apparently  we  must  seek  the  explanation  in  the 
resolutions  of  the  reformers  tliat  these  services 
should  be  intelligent  offerings,  and  not  mere  saying 
of  prayers  by  rote.  We  can  see  this  thought  every- 
where, and  the  intention  must  bu  commended  as 
praiseworthy. 

We  should  remark  that  the  Introit,  appointed  to 
be  said  after  the  Prayer  for  Purity  and  before  the 
Lesser  Litany  was  now  struck  out,  and  the  Gloria  in 
ExceUiiy  wliich  came  between  the  Lesser  Litany  and 
the  Collect  for  the  day,  was  removed  to  the  end  of 
the  service. 

Passing  over  changes  of  a  sligliter  character,  and 
transpositions,  some  of  which  have  been  noted,  we 
come  to  the  Canon  or  Prayer  of  Consecration,  di- 
vided, in  tlie  second  book,  into  three  parts,  already 
mentioneil,  whilst  some  portions  disappear.  The 
principal  changes  are  the  following:  In  the  first 
book  it  was  ordered  to  put  "  a  little  pure  and  clean 
water  "  to  tlie  wine.     In  the  second  this  is  omitted. 


Consecration  Prayer,  178 

The  crossings  and  manual  acts  are  also  omitted  iu 
the  second  boi^k;  also  the  reference  to  **the  glorious 
and  most  blessed  Virgin  Mary,"  and  to  the  "  holy 
patriarchs,  prophets,  apostles,  and  martyrs."  The 
invocation  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  also  omitted.  It  ran 
thus :  "  With  Thy  Holy  Spirit  and  Word  vouchsafe 
to  bless  and  sanctify  these  thy  gifts  and  creatures  of 
bread  and  wine,  that  they  may  be  unto  us  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Thy  most  dearly  beloved  Son,  Jesus 
Christ."  The  following  words,  coming  between  the 
Consecration  and  that  portion  of  the  Canon  which 
now  forms  the  Praj-er  after  the  second  Lord's 
Prayer,  were  also  omitted :  "Wherefore,  O  Lord 
and  Heavenly  Father,  according  to  the  institution  of 
Thy  dearly  beloved  Son,  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ, 
we  Thy  humble  servants  do  celebrate  and  make  here 
before  Thy  divine  majesty,  with  these  Thy  holy 
gifts,  the  memorial  which  Thy  Son  hath  willed  us  to 
make,  etc."  The  motive  was  still  the  desire  to  throw 
the  sacrificial  idea  into  the  background,  and  prob- 
ably also  to  disparage  the  doctrine  of  the  Real 
Presence. 

In  reference  to  the  vestments,  it  should  perhaps 
be  added  that  the  alternative  offered  in  the  first 
Prayer  Book  of  vestment  or  cope  was  not  sanc- 
tioned by  pre -reformation  usage,  the  cope  not  being 
regarded  as  a  Eucharistic  garment.  This  point 
should  be  kept  iu  mind  in  reference  to  subsequent 
orders. 

There  was  also  a  change  in  regard  to  the  elements, 
not  only  in  the  omission  of  the  mixture  of  water 
with  the  wine  already  noted,  but  in  the  instructions 


174  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

m !■ ^1      I.         BiiMM  ■  I        - ■Trr' 

with  regard  to  the  bread  to  be  used.  In  the  first 
book  it  was  ordered  that  it  should  be  made  **  through 
all  this  realm,  after  one  sort  and  fashion,  that  is  to 
say,  unleavened  and  round,  as  it  was  before,  but 
without  all  manner  of  print,  and  something  more 
larger  and  thicker  than  it  was,  so  that  it  may  be 
ai  tl}-  divided  in  divers  pieces :  and  every  one  shall 
be  divided  in  two  pieces  at  the  least,  or  more,  by  the 
discretion  of  the  minister,  and  so  distributed.  And 
men  must  not  think  less  to  be  received  in  part  than 
in  the  whole,  but  in  each  of  them  the  whole  body  of 
our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ."  In  the  second  book, 
there  is  a  great  change.  The  words  of  the  rubric 
run  thus:  "And  to  take  awjiy  the  superstition 
which  any  person  hath,  or  might  liave  in  the  bread 
and  wine,  it  shall  suffice  that  the  bread  be  such  as  is 
usual  to  be  eaten  at  the  table  with  other  meats,  but 
the  best  and  purest  wheat  bread  that  conveniently 
may  be  gotten."  Before  passing  away  from  the  sub- 
ject of  the  elements,  it  may  be  noted  that,  whereas 
the  first  of  the  two  sentences  now  employed  in  ad- 
ministering the  paten  or  chalice  wns  ordered  under 
the  first  book,  the  second  was  substituted  under  the 
second  book,  thus  removing  the  reference  to  the 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ. 

So  far  the  changes  had  been  considerable ;  but 
perhaps  the  most  serious  departure  from  the  earlier 
type  is  found  in  the  "Black  Rubric,"  introduced  by 
the  Council,  against  the  wishes  of  Craimier,  onl}'  a 
few  days  before  the  publication  of  the  book.  This 
rubric  was  removed  at  the  Elizabethan  revision,  and 
it  was  put  back  with  coubiderable  modifications  at 


The  Black  Rubric.  175 

the  Restoration  of  Charles  II.  Its  significance  at 
this  time  is  unquestionable.  After  setting  forth  that 
the  kneeling  at  the  reception  of  the  Sacrament  is  to 
show  the  communicant's  "humble  and  grateful  ac- 
knowledging of  the  benefits  of  Christ,"  the  rubric 
goes  on:  "Lest  the  same  meaning  might  be  thought 
or  taken  otherwise,  we  do  declare  that  it  is  not  meant 
thereby,  that  any  adoration  is  done,  or  ought  to  be 
done,  either  unto  the  sacramental  bread  or  wine  then 
bodily  received,  or  unto  any  real  and  essential  pres- 
ence then  being  of  Christ's  natural  flesh  and  blood. 
For  as  concerning  the  sacramental  bread  and  wine, 
they  remain  still  in  their  very  natural  substances, 
and  therefore  may  not  be  adored,  for  that  were  Idola- 
try to  be  abhorred  of  all  faitliful  Christians.  And 
as  concerning  the  natural  body  and  blood  of  our 
Saviour  Christ,  they  are  in  heaven  and  not  here. 
For  it  is  against  the  truth  of  Christ's  true  natural 
body  to  be  in  more  places  than  in  one  at  one  time.'* 

In  regard  to  the  toleration  of  the  ceremonies  in 
use  under  the  Latin  services,  we  have  seen  that  con- 
siderable liberty  was  allowed,  in  this  respect,  under 
the  first  book ;  and  that  it  was  onlv  when  a  certain 
number  among  the  Clergy  showed  a  determination 
to  retain  the  whole  mediajval  system,  as  far  as  that 
was  possible,  that  more  strenuous  measures  began  to 
be  taken.  But  there  was  a  considerable  change 
under  the  second  book.  Not  only  was  the  rubric  for 
the  manual  acts  withdrawn,  but  the  "  Certain  notes  " 
of  the  first  book,  one  of  which  allowed  "  touching, 
kneeling,  crossing,"  etc.,  "  as  every  man's  devotion 
serveth.'*     The  first  book  was  an  expression  of  the 


176  The  AnijUcan  Reformation. 

desire  of  the  reformers  to  retain,  as  far  as  possible, 
the  men  of  the  old  learning ;  and  Gardiner  declared 
himself  satisfied  with  it.  In  the  second  book  an  at- 
tempt was  made  to  include  those  who  had  adopted 
the  Swiss  type  of  reformation.  It  is  hardly  likely 
that  the  ordinary  manual  acts,  apart  from  crossings 
and  the  like,  were  intended  to  be  forbidden ;  but  it 
seems  quite  certain  that  none  were  required.  To 
this  day  the  rubrical  directions  of  the  Communion 
Service  are  most  incomplete.  It  is  probably  to  this 
period  that  we  must  look  back  for  an  explanation  of 
the  fact. 

The  alterations  in  the  Ordinal  were  of  the  same 
general  character  and  tendency  as  those  in  the  Com- 
munion Service.  In  the  ordering  of  Deacons  there 
is  no  change.  In  the  ordering  of  Priests  the  only 
change  is  the  omission  of  the  order  to  deliver  "  the 
chalice  or  cup  with  the  bread  in  the  other  hand," 
the  Bible  alone  being  given. 

In  the  Form  of  Consecrating  a  Bishop  the  habits 
of  the  ordinands  and  the  consecrators  are  not  men- 
tioned in  the  second  book  ["  the  elected  bishop  hav- 
ing upon  him  a  surplice  and  cope,  shall  be  presented 
by  two  bishops  being  also  in  surplices  and  copes, 
and  having  their  pastoral  staves  in  their  hands" — in 
the  first  book].  The  only  other  differences  are  first, 
the  delivering  of  the  Bible  to  the  consecrated  bishop, 
instead  of  laying  it  upon  his  head,  and  the  omission 
of  the  delivery  of  the  pastoral  staff,  together  with 
the  short  address  by  which  it  was  accompanied. 

The  book  was  to  come  into  use  on  All  Saints* 
Day ;  and,  as  the  King  died  early  in  July  of  the  fol- 


The  Articles,  177 


lowing  year,  it  liad  a  short  nine  months*  life  and 
prohftbly  in  many  parishes  was  never  used  at  all. 

The  compiling  of  a  set  of  doctrinal  articles  lay 
near  to  the  heart  of  the  young  King,  and  an  order 
of  Council  was  issued  in  1651 ;  upon  which  Cranmer 
and  Ridley  took  the  work  in  hand,  calling  in  the  as- 
sistance of  other  divines.  The  articles  as  drawn  up 
b}'  them  bear  traces  of  Lutheran  influence,  although 
there  seems  no  reason  to  suggest  that  concessions 
were  made  to  the  demands  of  foreign  theologians. 
On  May  2,  1552,  the  Council  wrote  to  Cranmer,  ask- 
ing for  the  articles ;  upon  which  they  were  sent,  that 
they  might  be  laid  before  the  King.  After  the  King's 
chai>lains  had  made  some  suggestions  upon  them,  they 
were  finally  sent  by  Cranmer  to  the  King  towards 
the  end  of  November,  1562.  They  were  ratified  by 
liim  and  published  by  his  command  May  20,  1553, 
tlie  delay  having  been  occasioned  by  the  fact  that 
Convocation  was  not  sitting  at  the  time  of  their  ap- 
proval by  the  King.  There  seems  no  good  reason  to 
doubt  that  the}'  were  approved  by  Convocation,  since 
they  bear  upon  their  face  the  statement  that  they 
were  "  agreed  upon  by  the  bishops  and  other  learned 
men  in  the  Synod  of  London  in  the  year  of  our  God 
1552,"  probably  in  the  month  of  March,  1553,  accord- 
ing to  our  reckoning.  It  will  be  more  convenient 
to  reserve  our  remarks  on  the  contents  of  the  Forty- 
two  Articles  now  published,  until  we  come  to  con- 
sider the  Thirty-nine  of  Elizabeth. 

If  we  have  devoted  a  considerable  space  to  the  ex- 
amination and  comparison  of  the  two  Prayer  Books 

of  Edward  VI.,  it  is  because  in  these  documents  we 
L 


'-?..>Vi>'.;-'.- 


178  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

may  read  the  inner  history  of  a  very  important  period 
of  the  English  Reformation.  No  one  would  pretend 
to  an  understanding  of  the  Christian  Church  from 
the  third  century  onwards,  who  had  not  made  him- 
self acquainted  with  the  decrees  of  the  more  impor- 
tant Councils ;  and  so  it  is  in  the  authoritative  doc- 
uments of  the  Anglican  Church  that  we  gain  an  in- 
sight into  the  influences  by  which  her  destinies  were 
shaped.  It  is  not  that  these  books  are  now  binding 
upon  any  one,  or  that  Anglicans  can  lay  hold  upon 
the  one  or  the  other  as  representing  the  true  An- 
glican doctrine  and  position.  Yet  it  is  more  than  a 
matter  of  historical  interest  that  we  should  be  able 
to  trace  the  way  by  which  the  Providence  of  God 
guided  this  great  Communion  in  her  endeavor  to  bear 
a  true  witness  for  Him,  and  to  conclusions  which 
were  ordained  to  exercise  an  influence  so  potent  on 
the  future  history  of  Christian  and  human  civiliza- 
tion. 

The  Duke  of  Some  3t  was  brought  to  the  scajffold 
on  January  22,  1552.  The  King,  his  nephew,  was 
sincerely  attached  to  him,  and  with  deep  regret  con- 
sented to  his  execution.  Like  many  other  men,  who 
have  enjoyed  great  popularity,  he  had  many  virtues 
and  many  vices.  He  was  sincerely  attached  to  the 
principles  of  the  Reformation,  which  his  successor 
only  pretended  to  be ;  but  his  greed  was  immeasur- 
able and  his  ambition  boundless.  He  must  be  placed 
among  those  who  helped  to  cast  discredit  on  the  work 
of  reformation. 

It  is  with  little  satisfaction  that  those  who  approve 
generally  of  the  course  taken  by  the  work  of  reform 


Reformation  under  Edward  VI.  179 

can  survey  its  consequences  up  to  the  present  time. 
It  is  quite  possible  that  men  living  at  tlie  time  may 
have  exaggerated  the  prevalent  evils,  and  at  the  same 
time  may  have  overlooked  the  benefits  whiuh  had 
flowed  from  the  changed  state  of  things.  But  it  is 
no  matter  of  surprise  that  so  great  a  revolution  should 
have  shaken  the  f^ith  of  many,  and  so  unsettled  their 
moral  principles ;  that  the  withdrawal  of  some  of  the 
old  restraints  should  have  bestowed  upon  many  the 
fatal  boon  of  a  liberty  which  they  could  only  abuse ; 
whilst  the  alienation  of  much  of  the  property  of  the 
Church  was  not  only,  to  a  large  extent,  inexpedient 
and  mischievous,  but  must  have  produced  the  very 
worst  effects  upon  those  who  profited  immediately 
by  that  which  must  be  called  robbery  and  in  some 
cases  sacrilege. 

If  such  expectations  might  be  entertained  with 
respect  to  the  consequences  of  the  Reformation,  it 
would  be  no  real  condemnation  of  the  movement, 
even  if  they  should  be  found  to  be  amply  verified. 
Accordingly  we  hear  of  the  distress  to  which  the 
poor  were  reduced  by  the  destruction  of  their  places 
of  refuge  and  the  drying  up  of  the  sources  from 
which  they  had  been  accustomed  to  receive  relief. 
With  examples  like  that  of  the  man  who  stood  next 
to  the  tlirone,  it  might  well  be  that  numbers  of  lesser 
men  should  endeavor  to  aggrandize  and  enrich  them- 
selves at  the  expense  of  the  Church  and  the  State. 
If  a  popular  and  religious  nobleman  like  the  Duke 
of  Somerset  attempted  to  seize  the  property  of 
the  Abbey  of  Westminster,  and  actually  raised  his 
great  Somerset  House  on  a  foundation  of  plunder, 


180  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

eucli  peculation  would  be  extended  far  and  wide. 
Impartial  testimonies  from  men  of  different  schools 
reveal  a  state  of  things  which  is  hardly  credible. 
Fuller,  in  his  Church  History,  tells  us  "  that  private 
men's  halls  were  hung  with  altar-cloths,  their  tables 
and  beds  covered  with  copes.  Many  drank  at  their 
daily  meals  in  chalices,  and  no  wonder  if,  in  propor- 
tion, it  came  to  the  share  of  their  horses  to  be 
watered  in  coffins  of  marble."  Of  still  greater  force 
is  the  testimony  of  "old  Hugh  Latimer,"  one  of 
the  most  faithful  and  unselfish  of  preachers.  Speak- 
ing of  "  what  hath  been  plucked  from  abbeys,  col- 
leges, and  chantries,"  he  says  it  is  marvelous  that 
no  more  should  be  "bestowed  on  this  holy  office  of 
Salvation  ;"  and  he  goes  on  :  "  It  may  still  be  said 
of  us  what  the  Lord  complaineth  by  his  prophet,  '  My 
house  ye  have  deserted,  and  run  every  man  to  his 
own  house.'  "What  is  Christ's  house  but  Christian 
souls?  But  who  maketh  any  provision  for  them  ? 
Every  man  scrapeth  and  getteth  together  for  his 
bodily  house,  but  the  soul's  health  is  neglected. 
Schools  are  not  maintained.  Scholars  have  not  ex- 
hibition ;  the  preaching  office  decayeth,  men  provide 
lands  and  riches  for  their  children,  but  this  most 
necessary  office  they  neglect.  If  it  be  no  better  in 
time  to  come  than  liitherto  looked  unto,  then  Eng- 
land will  at  the  last  bewail  it."  ' 

As  far  as  it  was  possible  for  him,  the  King  applied 
the  funds  arising  from  the  various  confiscations  to 
purposes  of  charity  and  education.  He  rcfounded 
several  hospitals,  he  set  up  and  endowed  Grammar 
Schools  throughout  the   country.     He  is  said,  on 


Work  of  Edward  VI.  181 

hearing  a  sermon  from  Bishop  Ridley,  to  have  sent 
for  the  preacher,  and  to  have  consulted  him  as  to  the 
best  method  of  providing  for  the  poor.  But  the 
bulk  of  the  property  taken  from  the  Church  went  to 
fill  the  coffers  of  the  hangers-on  of  the  Court,  and  the 
great  men  who  needed  to  be  bribed  to  support  the 
Reformation.  One  of  the  consequences  was  the 
shockingly  incapable  character  of  the  men  who  were 
appointed  to  benefices.  Hooper  found,  in  his  diocese, 
one  hundred  and  sixty-eight  priests  who  could  not  say 
the  Ten  Commandments.  In  some  parishes,  it  is  said, 
there  had  been  no  services  since  the  friaries  had  been 
suppressed.  Such  was  the  state  of  matters  when  the 
reign  of  Edward  VI.  drew  to  its  close. 

No  one  can  doubt  either  of  the  personal  piety  or  of 
the  great  ability  of  Edward  VI.  It  is  indeed  won- 
derful that  one  so  young  should  have  displayed  such 
capacity,  or  that  a  child,  coming  to  the  throne  at  his 
tender  years,  and  placed  in  such  an  environment, 
should  have  preserved  the  freshness  and  purity  of  his 
spiritual  life.  Whether  by  rational  conviction  or  by 
education,  he  was  also  sincerely  attached  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Reformation  ;  and  so  it  came  to  pass,  as 
his  end  drew  near,  that  he  was  deeply  concerned  as 
to  the  fortunes  of  the  Church,  if  his  elder  sister 
Mary  should  come  to  the  throne.  And  this  had  been 
the  arrangement  made  by  his  father,  Henry  VIII. : 
that,  in  case  of  Edward's  dying  without  heir,  Mary 
should  succeed,  and  after  her  Elizabeth  ;  and,  in  case 
of  all  his  children  dying  without  heir,  the  descend- 
ants of  his  younger  sister  Mary  should  succeed. 

The  Princess  Mary  had  shown  the  greatest  stub- 


182  The  Anglican  lieformation. 

bornness  or  firmness  (according  as  we  view  the  case) 
in  relation  to  the  Reformation  ;  and  finally,  when  the 
English  Prayer  Books  were  publislied,  she  ignored 
the  royal  command,  and  had  Mass  said  in  her  own 
chapel.  When  this  was  forbidden,  her  cousin,  the 
Emperor  interceded  on  her  behalf,  and  the  King's 
counsellors  recommended  that  it  would  be  better  to 
ignore  her  disobedience  and  leave  her  to  her  discre- 
tion ;  but  the  King,  regarding  tlie  Mass  as  idola- 
trous, would  not  consent  to  what  he  regarded  as  a 
sin.  Even  Cranmer  and  Ridley  gave  him  the  same 
counsel.  Every  means  was,  at  the  same  time,  taken 
to  bring  the  Princess  to  compliance  with  the  estab- 
lished order  of  things,  but  in  vain. 

When  it  became  probable  that  the  life  of  the 
young  King  was  drawing  to  an  end,  his  great  anxiety 
had  reference  to  tlie  prospects  of  religion  and  the 
Church.  At  this  time,  and  since  the  downfall  of 
Somerset,  the  cliief  power  behind  the  throne  was 
Dudley,  Earl  of  Warwick,  now  become  Duke  of 
Northumberland.  This  nobleman  had  married  his 
fourth  son,  Lord  Guildford  Dudley,  to  Lady  Jane 
Grey,  eldest  daughter  of  the  Duke  of  Suffolk,  whose 
wife,  Frances  Brandon,  was  the  daughter  of  Mary, 
the  younger  eister  of  Henry  VIIL  by  her  (second) 
marriage  to  Charles  Brandon,  Duke  of  Suffolk. 
When  the  Duke  of  Northumberland  saw  the  King's 
anxiety  as  to  the  future  of  tlie  Church,  he  and  his 
supporters  pressed  upon  him  to  settle  the  crown 
upon  Lady  Jane  Grey,  the  Duchess  of  Suffolk,  her 
mother,  being  ready  to  waive  her  own  rights  in  favor 
of  her  eldest  daughter.    It  is  not  known  how  they 


Edward'' s  Successor  Designated.  183 

induced  King  Edward  to  set  aside  his  sister  Eliza- 
betii,  to  whom  he  was  mucli  attached,  and  who  was 
known  to  favor  the  Reformation;  however,  they 
succeeded. 

The  King  then  summoned  the  Council  with  certain 
of  the  judges  and  told  them  of  his  decision.  At 
first,  the  legal  authorities  declared  that  the  Act  of 
succession,  being  an  Act  of  Parliament,  could  not 
be  set  aside  by  the  King's  letters  patent;  and  on 
further  examining  the  statutes,  they  found  that  to 
change  the  succession,  not  only  after  the  King's 
death  but  during  his  life,  was  treason ;  so  that  they 
declined  to  have  any  part  in  it.  In  spite  of  the 
angry  remonstrances  and  threats  of  Northumberland, 
the  judges  held  to  their  opinion,  Mountague,  the 
Chief  Justice  of  the  Common  Pleas,  proposing  that 
the  matter  should  be  delayed  until  Parliament  should 
meet.  But  the  King  determined  to  have  it  done 
first,  and  then  ratified  by  Parliament.  Mountague 
at  last  consented  to  draw  up  the  required  document 
on  two  conditions,  first,  that  he  should  have  a  com- 
mission from  the  King  requiring  him  to  do  it,  and  sec- 
ondly, a  pardon  under  the  great  seal  when  it  was 
done.  Both  of  these  were  granted,  and  he  obeyed, 
the  other  judges  except  Hales  concurring,  Gosnald, 
the  last  to  fall  in,  being  constrained  by  the  threats 
of  the  Duke  of  Northumberland  and  the  Earl  of 
Slirewsbury.  The  document  was  signed  by  the 
members  of  the  Council  and  by  most  of  the  judges. 
Cranmer,  satisfied  of  the  illegality  of  the  pro- 
cedure, absented  himself,  Jind  subsequently  declared 
that  he  would  never  consent  to  the  disinheriting  of 


1 


184 


The  Anglican  Reformation. 


the  daughters  of  his  late  master.  Cecil  was  induced 
to  sign  as  a  witness,  and,  when  Cranmer,  yielding  to 
the  King's  importunities,  reluctantly  affixed  his 
name,  it  is  probable  that  he  was  allowed  the  same 
privilege. 

Edward  died  (July  6,  1653)  as  he  had  lived,  *'  that 
incomparable  young  Prince,"  with  faith  in  God,  and 
submission  to  His  will,  yet  not  without  forebodings 
as  to  the  future  of  the  Church.  Whether  his  death 
was  ultimately  an  injury  to  the  English  Church  may 
be  questioned.  He  was  the  only  Puritan  King  that 
England  ever  had,  and,  if  his  opinions  had  remained, 
unchanged,  it  can  hardly  be  doubted  that  he  would 
have  favored  the  carrying  of  the  Reformation 
further.  It  is  useless,  however,  to  speculate  on  such 
contingencies.  The  Providence  of  God  ordered  it 
otherwise.  His  plans  for  the  succession  miscarried. 
The  proclamation  of  the  nine  days'  Queen  served 
only  to  make  the  throne  of  Mary  more  secure,  and 
give  her  more  absolute  control  of  the  government  in 
Church  and  State* 


CHAPTER  XV. 

ACCESSION  OP  MARY. 

ANY  influences  combined  to  make  the 
English  people  welcome  Mary  as  their 
Queen.  The  conduct  of  the  reforming 
party  had  done  something  to  alienate  all 
classes  in  the  community  from  a  movement,  in  which 
the  promoters,  while  professing  to  purify  the  Church, 
were  aggrandizing  themselves  and  robbing  the 
country  in  the  most  barefaced  manner.  Moreover, 
the  sense  of  justice  and  the  conservative  spirit  of 
the  people  combined  to  resent  the  deprival  of  the 
two  daughters  of  Henry  VIH.  of  the  rights  assured 
to  them  by  Act  of  Parliament. 

But  this  was  not  all.  The  Duke  of  Northumber- 
land had  become  deservedly  unpopular,  by  his  com- 
passing the  destruction  of  the  Duke  of  Somerset 
and  especially  by  his  treachery  in  securing  Lady 
Jane  Grey,  a  child  of  sixteen,  of  great  beauty,  in- 
telligence, and  virtue,  but  very  subject  to  the  author- 
ity of  her  elders,  as  wife  of  his  fourth  son,  Lord  Guild- 
ford Dudley,  and  having  her  proclaimed  Queen. 
The  Duke  of  Northumberland  need  not  detain  us 
longer.  It  is  sufficient  to  add  that,  although  he  had 
promoted  the  Protestant  movement  to  the  utmost 
during  the  life  of  King  Edward,  and  had  made  his 
zeal  for  the  Reformation  a  reason  for  his  advising 
the  settlement  of  the  succession  on  Lady  Jane  Grey, 

185 


186  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

when  he  was  brouglit  to  the  block,  he  declared  him- 
self a  Roman  Catholic. 

Mary  came  to  the  throne  deeply  embittered  against 
the  Reformation  and  having  no  real  sympathy  with 
the  people  whom  she  had  to  govern.^  She  was  half 
a  Spaniard  in  blood,  and  altogether  a  Spaniard  in 
nature.  She  never  forgot  the  cruel  wrongs  suffered 
by  her  mother ;  and  she  clung,  with  all  the  energy 
of  her  narrow  but  resolute  nature,  to  her  mother's 
religion.  She  not  merely  held  all  the  doctrinal 
tenets  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  as  her  father  had 
done,  but  she  held  as  firmly  to  the  supremacy  of  the 
Pope,  although,  for  a  short  time,  she  seemed  to  as- 
sume to  herself  the  place  of  Head  of  the  Church. 
If  Edward  was  the  only  Puritan  Sovereign  that 
England  has  ever  had,  Mary  was  the  only  papal  sov- 
ereign, the  only  one  who  completely  and  unreserv- 
edly conceded  to  the  Pope  all  that  he  claimed  and 
demanded. 

It  is  quite  likely  that  Mary  might  have  found  it 
diflQcult  if  not  impossible  to  carry  out  her  own  de- 
signs, but  for  the  rebellion  which  she  had  so  easily 
suppressed.  The  leading  men  of  the  old  learning, 
such  as  Gardiner  and  Bonner,  wanted  simply  to  re- 
store things  as  they  had  been  under  Henry  VIH. 
It  is  doubtful,  whether,  as  has  been  alleged,  they 
wished  to  go  back  to  the  time  before  Henry's  breach 
with  the  papacy.  They  had  gone  heartily  with  the 
King  in  the  assertion  of  the  Royal  Supremacy  :  they 
were  even  disposed  to  discourage  many  of  the  popu- 

•The  picture  of  Mary  in  Tennyson's  play  of  "Queen  Mary," 
is  admirable  for  its  trnlb  and  completeness. 


Mary^  Oardiner^  and  Bonner.  187 

^^^^M        Mil        I  ■■■  ^1  I  I  ■■■!  ■■^—    .■■■-  ■  -■  I..I.  I  ir  ■  -—  ■■■■,■■  ■■I-—         ■  .. 

ular  superstitions  of  the  age.  But  they  were  not 
prepared  to  accept  the  results  of  tlie  Edwardine  Ref- 
ormation, and  the  Queen  had  no  thouglit  of  ulti- 
mately tolerating  anything  which  had  been  done  to 
the  disparagement  of  the  papal  authority. 

Although  one  of  the  new  Queen's  first  acts  was 
to  liberate  the  imprisoned  bishops,  and  although  she 
had  Mass  said  openly  before  her,  yet  she  did  not  at 
once  alter  the  order  of  things  established  under  her 
brother's  reign.  Crannier  was  permitted  to  conduct 
the  funeral  service  of  Edward  according  to  the  re- 
vised Prayer  Book,  and  the  public  services  of  the 
Church  were,  for  a  time,  carried  on  in  English.  The 
sermon  at  King  Edward's  funeral  was  preached  by 
Bishop  Day,  now  at  liberty.  He  lauded  the  King, 
and  threw  all  the  blame  of  what  had  been  done 
upon  his  Council,  praising  the  new  Queen  greatly 
and  promising  the  people  happy  days  under  her  rule. 
Shortly  afterwards  (August  12)  she  declared  in  Coun- 
cil that,  although  she  would  maintain  her  own  faith 
and  worship,  she  would  put  no  compulsion  upon 
others.  Yet  she  trusted  that  by  the  word  of  God, 
exjDounded  by  godly  and  learned  preachers,  her 
people  might  come  to  be  of  her  faith. 

But  soon  an  incident  occurred  which  showed  that 
such  neutrality  would  not  long  be  possible.  When 
Bonner,  with  'h  j  other  deposed  bishops,  was  restored 
to  his  see,  he  went  to  St.  Paul's  on  Sunday,  August 
13,  where  Bourne  his  chaplain  preached  the  ser- 
mon. In  preaching  he  spoke  sharply  of  the  proceed- 
ings against  Bonner  in  the  previous  reign  ;  and  this 
provoked  the  people  who  disliked  Bonner  and  idol- 


188  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ized  the  memory  of  Edward,  so  that  a  great  tumult 
arose  in  the  Cathedral.  One  man  threw  a  dagger  at 
the  preacher,  which  stuck  in  the  wood  of  the  pulpit, 
Bourne  saving  himself  by  stooping  down.  The 
people  were  quieted  by  the  influence  of  Rogers  and 
another  by  whom  the  preacher  was  conducted  in 
safety  from  the  Church. 

This  occurrence  gave  the  Queen  an  excuse,  which 
was  probably  welcome  to  her,  for  putting  a  stop  to 
preaching  ;  and  therefore  (August  18)  she  put  forth 
a  proclamation  prohibiting  religious  discussions. 
She  declared  that,  although  she  was  of  the  same  re- 
ligion she  had  always  professed,  and  would  maintain 
it,  yet  "she  did  not  intend  to  compel  any  of  her  sub- 
jects to  it,  till  public  order  should  be  taken  in  it  by 
common  consent ;  requiring  all,  in  the  meanwhile, 
not  to  move  sedition  or  unquietness  till  such  order 
should  be  settled ;  and  not  to  use  the  name  of  papist 
or  heretic,  but  to  live  together  in  love  and  in  the  Tear 
of  God."  She  further  threatened  to  punish  any  who 
"made  assemblies  of  the  people,"  or  preached  or 
circulated  books  without  her  licence ;  and  hoped  she 
might  not  be  driven  to  the  "  extreme  execution  of 
the  laws,"  hinting  that  some  might  be  called  to  ac- 
count for  participation  in  the  late  rebellion,  a  very 
far-reaching  threat. 

Such  a  proclamation  meant  the  silencing  of  all  the 
Protestant  preachers  in  England,  who  were  little 
likely  to  obtain  a  licence,  if  they  applied  for  it. 
Gardiner,  who  had  been  appointed  Lord  Chancellor, 
received  commission  (August  29)  to  grant  licences 
under  the  great  seal  to  such  grave,  learned  and  dis- 


Judge  Hales.  189 


creet  persons  as  he  should  think  meet  and  able  to 
preach  God's  word  ;  which  clearly  meant  that  not 
only  would  the  reformers  be  refused  licences,  but 
that  men  of  opposite  opinions  would  be  appointed  to 
occupy  their  pulpits.  As  a  consequence,  several  of 
them  continued  to  preach  without  licence,  while 
some  said  prayers  in  church  and  gave  instructions  in 
private.  The  Council,  learning  that  their  orders 
had  been  disregarded,  sent  for  the  accused  and  com- 
mitted them  to  prison.  Bishop  Hooper  was  also 
sent  to  the  Fleet  (September  1)  and  Coverdale  of 
Exeter  ordered  to  wait  their  pleasure. 

One  of  the  hardest  cases  was  that  of  Judge  Hales, 
who  had  held  out  to  the  last  against  Edward's  dis- 
position of  the  Crown,  standing  up  for  the  rights  of 
Mary.  Thinking  that  one  so  loyal  might  safely 
speak  his  mind,  he  gave  a  charge  to  the  Justices  of 
the  Peace  at  the  Quarter  Sessions  in  Kent,  that  they 
should  see  to  the  execution  of  King  Edward's  laws 
which  were  still  unrepealed  and  in  force.  He  was 
rewarded  for  his  former  fidelity  by  being  sent  first  to 
the  King's  Bench  and  afterwards  to  the  Fleet.  Here 
he  was  so  excited  by  what  he  was  told  of  the  pros- 
pects of  recusants,  that  he  endeavored  to  take  away 
his  life,  and,  although  he  was  afterwards,  on  his  sub- 
mission, released,  he  never  recovered  his  self-control, 
and  not  long  after  drowned  himself. 

While  some  thought  it  their  duty  to  disregard  the 
Queen's  proclamation,  others  sought  for  safety  on 
the  continent.  Peter  Martyr  was  so  roughly  handled 
at  Oxford  that  he  fled  for  safety  to  Lambeth,  where, 
however,  Cranmer  was  very  uncertain  of  being  able 


190  lite  Anglican  Reformation. 

to  protect  himself.  The  position  of  the  Archbishop' 
was  one  of  great  difficulty.  On  the  one  hand,  the 
doctrine  against  which  he  had  contended  was  now 
reestablished  by  the  celebration  of  the  Mass ;  yet  he 
felt  a  difficulty  about  provoking  a  controversy  with 
the  authority  of  the  Queen.  So  it  got  abroad  tliat 
lie  was  ready  to  do  whatever  she  might  command. 
Bonner,  in  his  insolent  way,  writes  to  a  correspond- 
ent (Sept.  6),  *'  Mr.  Canterbury  was  become  very 
humble,  and  ready  to  submit  himself  in  all  things ; 
but  that  wmld  not  serve  his  turn ;  and  it  was  ex- 
pected he  should  be  sent  to  the  Tower  that  vary 
day.'*  Cranmer  was  strongly  recommended  to  sava 
himself  by  flight,  whicli  miglit  still  have  been  possi- 
ble ;  but  he  said,  considering  his  position,  and  wliat 
hand  lie  had  in  all  the  changes  that  were  made,  it 
would  be  an  indecent  thing  for  him  to  fly. 

Before  this  he  had  been  twice  summoned  before 
the  Council,  in  the  month  of  August,  and  interro- 
gated on  the  part  he  had  taken  in  securing  the  suc- 
cession to  Lady  Jane,  and  again  on  the  possession  of 
his  see.  No  further  measures  were  then  taken  ex- 
cept to  require  him  to  remain  in  his  palace  at  Lam- 
beth. The  report  having  gone  abroad  that  the  Latin 
Mass  was  again  celebrated  in  Canterbury  Cathedral, 
by  his  authority,  he  drew  up  a  statement  on  tha  sub- 
ject. The  Mass,  he  said,  had  not  been  set  np  at 
Canterbury  by  his  order,  but  by  "a  fawning  hypo- 
critical Monk,"  namely  Thornton,  Bishop  Suffragan 
of  Dover.  He  maintained  that,  whilst  Henry  VHL 
had  begun  the  work  of  reform,  his  son  had  brought 
it  to  a  further  perfection ;  and  that  now  the  Lord's 


Cranmer^s  Danger.  191 

Supper  was  celebrated  aa  it  liad  been  in  the  primi- 
tive Church.  Moreover,  he  offers,  with  Peter  Mar- 
tyr, to  defend  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  and  the 
other  rites  of  their  service ;  and  tilso  the  whole  doc- 
trine and  order  of  religion  s^t  fortli  by  the  late  King, 
as  more  pure  and  aj:^reeable  to  the  Word  of  God 
than  any  sort  of  religion  that  had  been  in  England 
for  a  thousand  years. 

Cranmer  stated  afterwards  that  he  intended  to  revise 
his  Tract  and  publish  it.  But  he  showed  it  to  Scory, 
who  had  been  Bishop  of  Chichester,  wishing  to  ob- 
tain his  judgment  upon  it.  Scory,  without  the  Arch- 
bishop's leave,  circulated  the  paper,  and  on  the  5th 
of  September  a  copy  was  publicly  read  in  Cheapside. 
On  the  8th  of  that  month  he  was  summoned  before 
the  Star  Chamber,  and  asked  if  he  was  the  author  of 
that  seditious  bill,  and  if  so,  whether  he  was  sorry 
for  it.  He  confessed  that  it  was  his,  and  regretted 
that  it  had  been  published  prematurely,  as  he  had 
intended  to  enlarge  it  and  to  fix  it  at  the  door  of  St. 
Paul's  and  the  other  Churches  of  London  with  his 
hand  and  seal  to  it.     For  the  time  he  was  dismissed. 

It  was  then  seriously  debated  what  should  be 
done  with  the  Archbishop.  There  was  a  danger  in 
proceeding  with  too  great  harshness  against  one  held 
in  so  much  esteem,  and  this  was  Gardiner's  view. 
To  others  it  seemed  necessary  that  one  who  had  been 
the  ringleader  in  heresy  should  not  escape  lest  others 
should  be  encouraged  in  their  obstinacy.  But  there 
was  one  thing  that  Mary  could  neither  forget  nor 
forgive,  and  that  was  the  part  that  Cranmer  had 
taken  in  the  divorce  of  her  mother.     Accordingly, 


192  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

he  and  Latimer  were  siimraonecl  before  the  Council 
on  the  13th  of  September.  On  that  day  Latimer 
was  committed.  On  the  following  day  Cranmer  was 
sent  to  the  Tower  for  matters  of  treason  against  the 
Queen  and  for  circulating  seditious  bills. 

Less  severe  measures  were  taken  with  the  foreign 
Protestants  who  had  been  allowed  to  settle  in  Eng- 
land during  the  previous  reign.  Peter  Martyr  was 
allowed  to  depart  for  the^Continent.  John  b,  Lasco 
and  his  congregation  were  ordered  to  leave  the  coun- 
try ;  and  the  history  of  their  departure  casts  a  sad 
light  on  the  history  and  fortunes  of  the  Reformation 
movement.  A  hundred  and  seventy-five  of  them 
sailed  in  two  ships  to  Denmark,  where  the  Lutheran 
type  of  Reformation  had  been  established.  They 
were  received  with  as  little  hospitality  as  if  they  had 
landed  in  a  Roman  Catholic  country,  when  it  was 
found  that  they  were  of  the  Helvetian  Confession; 
and,  although  it  was  in  the  month  of  December,  and 
a  very  severe  winter,  they  were  required  to  take 
tliemselves  off  in  two  days,  and  were  not  permitted 
to  leave  even  their  wives  and  children  for  a  time  be- 
hind them.  They  proceeded  successively  to  Liibeck, 
Wismar,  and  Hamburg,  "  where  they  found  the  dis- 
putes about  the  manner  of  Christ's  presence  in  the 
Sacrament  had  raised  such  violent  animosities,  that, 
after  much  barbarous  usage,  they  were  banished  out 
of  all  these  towns,"  and  at  last  found  a  resting  place 
in  Friesland.  Is  it  wonderful  that  the  Reformation 
movement,  which  at  one  time  seemed  likely  to  sweep 
all  over  Europe,  should  come  to  a  stop,  and  even  be 
driven   back?     Well   might   Bossuet   write  on  the 


Beginning  of  Mary^s  Reign,  193 

variations  of  Protestants !  Well  might  their  adver- 
saries say  they  were  animated  by  self-will,  and  not 
by  obedience  to  God  and  His  Gospel  I 

The  Queen  was  crowned  on  the  1st  of  October  by 
Gardiner;  and  on  that  day  she  issued  a  proclama- 
tion in  which,  after  referring  very  artfully  to  the 
large  expenditure  and  heavy  demands  upon  the 
nation  which  had  been  rendered  necessary  by  the 
bad  government  of  her  brother's  Counsellors,  and  the 
necessities  of  the  country,  she  said,  she  would  remit 
the  subsidies  which  were  now  due  to  her,  out  of  love 
for  her  subjects  and  desire  for  their  good  will. 

Parliament  assembled  October  6th,  being  sum- 
moned by  the  Queen  as  still  "Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church."  Most  of  the  reformed  bishops  were  in 
prison.  Two  only,  Taylor,  of  Lincoln,  and  Hawley, 
of  Hereford,  were  there.  When  the  Mass  began, 
they  withdrew,  and  were  never  allowed  to  take  their 
places  again.  Another  account  says  that  Taylor  was 
there  in  his  robes;  but,  as  he  refused  to  pay  any  rev- 
erence to  the  Mass,  he  was  forcibly  expelled  from  the 
house. 

It  would  appear  that  a  determined  effort  was  made, 
on  this  occasion,  to  obtain  a  Parliament  favorable  to 
the  policy  of  the  Queen.  Threats  and  violence  were 
used  to  prevent  freedom  of  voting:  false  returns  were 
made :  some  were  turned  out  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons, so  that  it  might  well  be  doubted  whether  its 
acts  would  be  valid.  In  spite  of  all  this  the  Parlia- 
ment was  not  found  so  tractable  as  had  been  desired; 
and  very  little  was  done.  The  Parliament  was  pro- 
rogued from  the  21st  to  the  24th  of  October ;  and  on 
M 


194  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

the  26th  a  Bill  to  annul  the  divorce  of  Catharine 
from  Henry,  and  so  to  legitimize  the  Queen,  was  sent 
down  from  the  Lords,  and  was  passed  by  the  Com- 
mons on  the  28th.  The  marriage  was  declared  to  be 
a  quite  lawful  one,  its  condemnation  had  been  ob- 
tained by  evil  means,  and  the  sentence  given  by 
Cranmer  was  unlawful,  and  of  no  force  from  the 
beginning;  so  that  now  the  acts  of  Parliament  which 
Lad  confirmed  it  were  repealed.  This  was  done  by 
Gardiner  who,  with  the  greatest  effrontery,  ignored 
the  fact  that  he  had  been  as  much  concerned  in  the 
divorce  as  Cranmer,  indeed  he  was  forwarding  the 
measure  before  Cranmer  had  any  hand  in  it,  and  he 
had  as  little  dared  to  resist  the  w^'li  of  King  Henry. 

The  quashing  of  the  divorce  had  the  effect  of  an- 
nulling the  King's  marriage  to  Anne  Boleyn,  by 
which  means  the  Princess  Elizabeth  was  rendered 
illegitimate.  She  had  been  declared  to  be  so  at  the 
time  of  her  mother's  execution ;  but  the  disposition 
of  the  succession  by  Henry,  confirmed  by  Parliament, 
had  taken  off  this  disqualification.  Up  to  this  time 
it  is  said  that  Mary  had  borne  herself  affectionately 
towards  Elizabeth,  partly,  perhaps,  because  they  were 
both  exposed  to  similar  dangers ;  but  from  this  time 
she  treated  her  with  greater  harshness,  and  indeed 
at  a  subsequent  period  she  seems  to  have  been  in 
some  danger.  Whether  the  change  in  her  conduct 
was  brought  about  by  the  alteration  in  her  legal 
status  is  uncertain.  Some  have  thought  that  it  was 
the  result  of  personal  jealousy.  Courtenay,  Earl  of 
Devon,  was  at  this  time  so  great  a  favorite  that  it 
was  thought  the  Queen  wished  to  marry  him ;  but 


Changes  made  hy  Mary,  195 

the  Lady  Elizabeth  was  nineteen  years  younger  and 
better  favored,  so  his  Lordship  paid  court  to  her, 
which  afterwards  brought  them  both  into  trouble. 

And  now  a  beginning  was  made  with  ecclesiastical 
legislation.  A  sweeping  measure  was  introduced  for 
the  repeal  of  all  the  laws  of  this  character  passed 
during  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  The  House  of 
Lords  seems  to  have  passed  this  Bill  without  diffi- 
culty, the  reforming  bishops  being  in  prison,  and 
some  of  the  reformed  peers  being  in  danger  of  their 
necks  through  the  rebellion.  In  the  House  of  Com- 
mons it  was  debated  hotly  for  about  a  week,  and  a 
considerable  minority  voted  against  it.  It  carried, 
however,  and  it  was  enacted  that,  from  the  20th  of 
December  next,  there  should  be  no  form  of  service 
in  churches  but  that  which  had  been  used  in  the  last 
year  of  King  Henry  VIII.  Until  that  time  they 
might  use  either  of  the  Books  sanctioned  by  King 
Edward  or  the  Latin  service,  at  their  pleasure. 

Several  other  Acts  were  now  passed,  the  Parlia- 
ment apparently  being  ready  to  go  all  lengths.  An 
Act  was  passed  forbidding  the  molesting  of  priests, 
condemning  the  abuse  of  the  Holy  Sacrament,  the 
breaking  of  altars,  crucifixes,  and  crosses,  under  pen- 
alty of  three  months*  imprisonment.  The  Commons 
in  their  zeal  sent  up  another  Bill  to  the  House  of 
Lords  against  those  who  should  neglect  to  come  to 
Church  or  to  the  Sacraments  after  the  old  service 
should  be  restored.  This  was  thrown  out  by  the 
House  of  Lords  from  the  fear  that  the  nation  might 
be  alarmed  at  the  sudden  passing  "of  laws  of  such  se- 
verity, rather  than  from  any  disinclination  to  the 


196  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

measure  on  the  part  of  the  peers.  Another  Act  was 
passed  against  unlawful  assemblies,  to  the  effect  that, 
if  any,  to  the  number  of  twelve  or  above,  should  meet 
to  alter  anything  of  religion  established  by  law,  and 
should  refuse  to  disperse  when  required  by  any  hav- 
ing the  Queen's  authority,  remaining  after  that  au 
hour  together,  it  should  be  felony. 

Convocation  showed  a  spirit  even  more  opposed  to 
the  Reformation.  It  is  probable  that  the  majority 
of  the  clergy  had  never  been  quite  favorable  to  the 
changes,  and  now  the  leaders  of  the  reforming  party 
were  in  prison  or  out  of  the  country.  On  the  20th 
of  October  two  resolutions  were  brought  before  the 
House,  the  one  asserting  the  presence  of  the  natural 
Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Eucharist,  the  other 
condemning  the  Catechism  falsely  pretended  to  be 
Let  forth  by  the  late  Convocation.  It  was  contended 
by  Philpot,  Archdeacoa  of  Winchester,  that  the  Cate- 
chisrii  had  been  approved  by  a  committee  appointed 
to  act  for  Convocation;  and  he  and  four  others  de- 
clined to  sign  the  declaration  as  to  Transubstantia- 
tion,  demanding  a  public  discussion  on  the  subject, 
in  which  they  requestod  that  Bishop  Ridley,  Rogers, 
and  some  others  should  be  allowed  to  take  part.  The 
challenge  was  declined. 

On  the  13th  of  November,  Archbishop  Cranmer, 
Lord  Guildford  Dudley  and  Lady  Jane,  and  two 
brothers  of  Lord  Guildford  were  brought  to  trial  for 
treason.  They  all  pleaded  guilty,  Cranmer  urging 
that  he  had  consented  unwillingly,  submitting  him- 
self to  the  Queen's  mercy.  It  is  not  quite  easy  to 
determine  why  Mary  did  not  now  proceed  to  inflict 


Cranmer  and  Mary.  197 

upon  Cranmer  and  the  others  the  penalty  of  treason. 
It  has  been  said  that  she  was  not  naturally  blood- 
thirsty tntil  her  fanaticism  was  aroused;  but  it  is 
difficult  to  believe  tliat  she  had  forgiven  the  dishonor 
done  by  Cranmer  to  her  mother.  She  was  mdeed  un- 
der great  personal  obligation  to  the  Archbishop  who, 
it  is  believed,  actually  saved  her  life,  wlien  her  father, 
incensed  at  her  obstinacy,  threatened  her  with  death ; 
and  she  may  have  wished  to  show  her  gratitude  for 
this  favor.  Whatever  the  reason  may  have  been, 
Cranmer  was  not  actually  deprived  of  the  Arch- 
bishopric, but  its  fruits  were  sequestrated,  and  he 
was  retained  in  prison.  The  other  accused  persons 
were  also  sent  back  to  prison. 

About  this  time  negotiations  seem  to  have  been 
opened  with  the  Pope,  in  order  to  effect  a  reconcili- 
ation between  the  Church  of  England  and  the  see  of 
Rome.  Mary  did  not  conceal  her  own  wishes,  but 
she  pointed  out  to  the  Pope's  representatives  that  it 
was  necessary  to  proceed  in  the  matter  with  great 
caution ;  and  not  to  lose  England,  as  they  had  done 
before,  by  too  much  stiffness.  By  way  of  keeping 
such  communication  open,  it  was  proposed  to  send 
Pole  as  legate  to  England ;  but  this  was  opposed  by 
Gardiner,  who  represented  to  the  Emperor  that 
things  were  going  quite  well,  and  this  might  spoil 
all.  The  Emperor  had  his  own  designs  which,  for 
the  time,  fell  in  with  Gardiner's  advice. 

It  was  about  this  time  that  Charles  V.,  the 
Queen's  first  cousin,  began  to  entertain  the  idea  of 
marrying  his  son  Philip  to  Mary,  who  was  now 
thirty-seven   and  nearly  twelve  years  older  than 


198  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Philip.  It  was  a  match  which  had  great  attractions 
for  the  Emperor,  if  not  entirely  for  his  sou,  and  the 
realization  of  it  became  a  passion  with  Mary.  On  the 
one  hand,  the  Emperor  saw  that  an  alliance  with 
England  would  be  of  the  greatest  advantage  to  Spain 
politically  and  commercially,  and  would  curb  the 
power  of  France.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Queen 
saw  in  such  a  union  the  surest  way  to  a  reconciliation 
with  Rome,  and  the  restoration  of  the  papal  power 
in  England.  The  Emperor,  fearing  that  Pole's  mis- 
sion might  interfere  with  these  designs,  got  the 
Queen  to  stop  him,  on  the  ground  that  precipitancy 
might  defeat  the  end  which  they  had  in  view. 

From  the  beginning  of  her  reign  the  Queen  had 
two  possible  courses  before  her.  She  might  have 
carried  on  the  system  sanctioned  by  her  father,  keep- 
ing her  own  place  as  Head  or  Supreme  Governor  of 
the  Church  ;  and  in  this  course  she  would  probably 
have  had  the  support  of  the  great  majority  of  her 
people.  The  English  nation  was  not  yet  Protestant, 
although  it  was  anti-papal.  It  was  reserved  for 
Mary  herself  to  bring  to  maturity  the  seeds  of  Prot- 
estantism and  Puritanism,  which  were  but  scanty 
and  weak  before  her  reign.  Had  she  stuck  to  this 
course,  which  she  seemed  to  take  at  first,  and  which 
was  supported  by  Gardiner  and  most  of  the  bishops 
and  divines  of  the  old  learning,  she  might  have  prac- 
tically extinguished  the  doctrinal  reformation  in 
England.  But  this  was  not  her  intention.  From 
the  very  first,  she  designed  to  go  back  not  to  the  last 
years  of  her  father,  even  to  his  reactionary  period, 
but  to  the  time  before  the  break  with  Rome.    Such 


The  Spanish  Marriage.  199 

was  her  fixed  purpose,  of  which  she  never  lost  sight; 
and  she  saw  in  her  marriage  with  Pliilip  the  means 
of  bringing  it  to  effect ;  but  she  also  soon  got  to 
know  that  such  a  marriage  was  hateful  to  lier  people. 

The  Spanish  marriage  was  not  only  distasteful  to 
the  friends  of  the  Reformation :  it  was  equally  dis- 
liked by  those  who  cared  for  the  civil  liberties  of 
the  people,  since  they  feared  that  England  would 
become  little  more  than  a  province  of  Spain.  The 
general  discontent  broke  out  in  the  rebellion  headed 
by  Sir  Thomas  Wyatt,  the  Duke  of  Suffolk  (Lady 
Jane's  father),  and  Sir  Peter  Carew.  At  first  the 
rising  seemed  not  unlikely  to  succeed,  but  it  was 
speedily  suppressed.  It  cost  the  lives  of  Lord 
Guildford,  his  wife,  her  father,  and  many  others. 
The  Lady  Jane  died  in  a  manner  worthy  of  her  no- 
bility and  piety ;  and  it  was  only  the  reflection  that 
the  Queen  had  been  driven  to  take  her  life  that  pre- 
vented a  violent  reaction  against  her.  The  Judge, 
Morgan,  by  whom  she  was  sentenced  is  said  to  have 
gone  mad  in  consequence.  The  Earl  of  Devon  and 
the  Princess  of  Elizabeth  were  suspected  of  com- 
plicity in  the  plot,  but  Wyatt  cleared  them  of  the 
suspicion.  But  the  Queen  made  it  a  pretext  for 
casting  her  sister  into  prison  in  the  tower.  She  had 
the  saddest  forebodings  of  the  fate  intended  for  her, 
but  shortly  after  was  removed  and  placed  under  the 
care  of  those  who  would  be  answerable  for  her. 

Mary's  second  Parliament  met  on  the  2d  of  April, 
1554.  It  was  believed  that  many  of  the  members 
were  bribed  to  vote  in  favor  of  the  marriage.  But 
the  first  proceeding  was  to  declare  the  authority  of 


200  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

the  Queen  to  be  equal  to  that  of  a  King.  Vaiiou8 
reasons  were  assigned  for  this,  among  others,  that 
Philip,  who  claimed  descent  from  John  of  Gaunt, 
might  set  aside  the  Queen,  and  assert  his  own  right 
of  governing. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  incidents  of  this 
period  was  the  discussion  of  the  nature  of  the  Eu- 
charist which  liad  been  mismanaged  in  the  previous 
Convocation.  It  was  resolved  to  adjourn  this  Con- 
vocation and  send  the  prolocutor  and  some  other 
members  to  Oxford  that  the  discussion  might  take 
place  before  the  whole  university.  For  this  purpose 
Cranmer  and  Ridley  were  removed  from  the  Tower 
to  the  prison  at  Oxford.  Latimer  was  also  sent  to 
take  part  in  the  debate.  Three  propositions  were 
offered  for  discussion:  "1.  In  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar,  by  virtue  of  the  divine  word  spoken  by  the 
Priest,  there  is  present  really,  under  the  forms  of 
bread  and  wine,  the  natural  Body  of  Christ  which 
was  conceived  by  the  Virgin  Mary,  also  His  natural 
Blood.  2.  After  Consecration  there  remtiins  not  the 
substance  of  bread  and  wine,  nor  any  other  sub- 
stance, except  the  substance  of  Christ,  God  and  man. 
3.  In  the  Mass  is  the  life-giving  propitiatory  sacrifice 
for  the  sins  both  of  the  living  and  the  dead."  It 
has  been  thought  that  the  whole  proceeding  was  a 
device  by  which  the  bishops  might  be  led  so  to  com- 
mit themselves  that  a  charge  of  heresy  might  be 
founded  on  their  words. 

The  disputation  was  held  in  the  chancel  of  the 
University  Church  (April  16,  1554).  Cranmer  in- 
sisted on  the  figurative  meaning  of  the  words  that 


Debate  on  the  Eucharist.  201 

spoke  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  in  the  Sacra- 
ment. The  prolocutor,  Weston,  behaved  with  great 
insolence,  speaking  of  the  Archbishop  as  unlearned 
and  unskilful.  Many  in  the  audience  also  hissed 
him,  of  which  he  took  no  notice.  The  whole  pro- 
ceedings, which  lasted  from  the  morning  until  two 
o'clock,  weie  of  the  most  disorderly  character. 

Tlie  next  day  Ridley  was  called.  He  declared  that 
formerly  he  had  held  the  mediseval  view,  but  that  he 
had  changed  by  conviction  and  for  no  worldly  con- 
sideration. What  he  held  he  had  gathered  from  the 
Word  of  God  and  the  Fathers;  and  he  asked  that  he 
might  be  permitted  to  speak  without  interruption. 
This  was  assured  to  him ;  but  the  promise  was  not 
kept.  It  was  said  to  be  a  powerful  speech,  contain- 
ing all  the  principal  arguments  for  his  opinion.  The" 
dispute  between  him  and  Smith  was  stopped  by 
Weston,  who,  in  his  usual  abusive  manner,  sneered 
insultingly  at  Ridley,  and  asked  the  audience  to  join 
in  exclaiming  with  hiin  :  "  Truth  has  the  victory." 
Next  day  Latimer  spoke,  saying,  he  was  too  old  to 
argue,  but  he  would  state  his  convictions  which  he 
had  long  ago  arrived  at,  and  now  held  fast.  The 
whole  proceedings  were  as  before  most  disorderly. 

On  the  20th  of  April  the  three  bishops  were  again 
brought  to  St.  Mary's  Church,  and  Avere  required  by 
the  Commissioners  to  sign  the  propositions  which 
had  been  set  forth  for  debate,  on  the  ground  that 
they  had  been  refuted.  Cranmer  declared  that  he 
had  had  no  liberty  of  disputation,  since  they  would 
not  listen  to  his  arguments,  as  many  as  four  or  five 
of  them  interrupting  him  at  once.     In  conclusion,  he 


202  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

refused  to  subscribe.  So  did  Ridley  and  Latimer ; 
and  the}'  were  all  three  pronounced  guilty  of  heresy, 
and  declared  to  be  excommunicated.  They  solemnly 
appealed  from  that  judgment  and  sentence  to  the 
just  judgment  of  Almighty  God;  and  they  all  prepared 
theuiselves  for  death,  which  they  knew  to  be  the 
sequel  to  their  condemnation. 

An  attempt  was  made  to  get  up  a  similar  discus- 
sion at  Cambridge  with  Hooper,  Rogers,  and  others ; 
but,  as  they  knew  what  had  taken  place  at  Oxford, 
they  refused  to  repeat  the  farce  ;  while  at  the  same 
time  they  gave  utterance  to  their  convictions  on  the 
subjects  in  debate. 

On  the  20th  of  July  Prince  Philip  landed  at 
Southampton.  When  the  Mayor  delivered  the  keys 
of  the  town  into  his  hands,  as  was  customary  when 
princes  visited  a  place,  he  gave  them  back  without 
speaking  a  word  or  expressing  any  pleasure.  This 
was  not  the  deportment  to  which  Englishmen  were 
accustomed  from  their  princes ;  and  the  coldness  and 
austerity  of  the  Spaniard  struck  a  chill  into  the 
hearts  of  the  people,  which  he  took  no  pains  after- 
wards to  remove.  Mary  met  him  at  Winchester,  and 
they  were  there  married  by  Gardiner,  July  25, 1664, 
their  ages  being  respectively  twenty-seven  and 
thirty-eight;  and  on  the  27th  they  were  proclaimed: 
**  Philip  and  Mary,  King  and  Queen  of  England, 
France,  Naples,  Jerusalem,  and  Iieland ;  Princes  of 
Spain  and  Sicily,  Defenders  of  the  faith  ;  Archdukes 
of  Austria;  Dukes  of  Milan,  Burgundy,  and  Brab- 
ant; Counts  of  Hapsburg,  Flanders,  and  Tyrol." 


CHAPTER  XVI. 

THE  MARIAN  PERSECUTION. 

HE  marriage  of  Mary  Tudor  with  Prince 
Philip  of  Spain  marks  tiie  beginning  of  a 
new  epoch  in  English  Church  history. 
The  Queen  had  the  English  reaction  on 
her  side,  a  servile  Parliament  ready  to  do  her  bid- 
ding, and  the  power  of  Spain  behind  her  in  case  of 
force  being  needed.  Nor  was  it  only  the  military 
power  of  his  people  that  Philip  could  command. 
Although  he  never  gained  any  kind  of  popularity 
with  the  English,  yet  he  brought  with  liim  argu- 
ments which  all  could  understand  in  the  form  of  a 
vast  treasure,  consisting  of  seven  and  twenty  -"hests 
of  bullion,  every  chest  more  than  a  yard  long, 
drawn  in  twenty  carts  to  the  Tower ;  and  after  that 
ninety-nine  horses  and  two  carts,  loaded  with  gold 
and  silver  coins.  But  still  more  than  by  his  money 
Philip  was  commended  to  the  regard  of  the  English 
people  by  his  intercessions  with  the  Queen  on  behalf 
of  many  persons  in  prison,  and  more  particularly  the 
Princess  Elizabeth  and  Courtenay,  Earl  of  Devon. 
Gardiner,  who  detested  Elizabeth  almost  as  much  as 
he  did  Cranmer,  would  have  it  that  Wyatt's  original 
accusation  was  to  be  believed,  and  not  his  recanta- 
tion at  the  scaffold,  since  he  knew  that  the  reaction 
was  not  safe  while  Elizabeth  was  alive.    Philip,  in 

203 


204  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

interceding  for  the  Princess,  now  only  one  and 
twenty,  was  doubtless  moved  by  simple  compas- 
sion. But  this  feeling  may  have  been  reinforced  by 
the  consideration  that  the  death  of  Elizabeth  would 
liave  removed  an  obstacle  to  the  future  accession  of 
Mary  Queen  of  Scots,  and  so  to  the  aggrandizement 
of  France. 

Mary's  third  Parliament  assembled  on  the  1st  of 
November,  and  on  the  22d  the  attainder  of  Pole  was 
removed,  so  that  he  could  now  appear  in  England  as 
papal  legate.  Care  was  taken,  before  his  appearance, 
to  appease  the  alarm  of  those  who  had  got  possession 
of  Church  lands ;  and  the  legate  arrived  furnished 
with  a  Bull  empowering  him  to  "give,  aliene,  and 
transfer  "  all  Church  property  to  its  present  holders. 

On  the  28th  he  met  the  Parliament,  and  made  a 
long  speech,  inviting  them  to  a  reconciliation  with 
the  apostolic  see.  Next  day  the  Speaker  reported 
to  the  Commons  the  substance  of  the  speech ;  and  a 
petition  containing  an  address  to  the  King  and 
Queen,  was  drawn  up  by  a  committee,  and  approved 
by  both  houses,  confessing  the  "horrible  defection 
and  schism  "  of  the  country  "  from  the  apostolic 
see,"  of  which  they  now  sincerely  repented,  and  de- 
claring their  readiness  "  to  repeal  all  the  laws  made 
in  prejudice  of  that  see."  The  address  proceeded  to 
plead  chat  "as  the  King  and  Queen  had  been  in  no 
way  defiled  by  their  schism,  they  pra}"  them  to  be 
intercessors  with  the  Legate  to  grant  them  absolu- 
tion, and  to  receive  them  again  into  the  bosom  of  the 
Church." 

On  the  following  day,  November  30,  the  King, 


Enyland  Reconciled  to  the  Papacy.  205 

Queen,  and  Legate  were  present,  the  Queen  on  the 
throne.  The  Chancellor  read  the  petition  to  the 
King  and  Queen :  they  also  addressed  the  Cardinal ; 
and  he,  after  a  long  speech,  setting  forth  the  evils  of 
the  Reformation,  and  enjoining  them,  as  penance, 
the  repealing  of  the  laws  which  they  had  made,  ab" 
solved  "  all  those  present,  and  the  whole  nation,  and 
the  dominions  thereof,  from  all  heresy  and  schism, 
and  all  judgments,  censures,  and  penalties  for  that 
cause  incurred ;  and  restored  them  to  the  communion 
of  Holy  Church,  in  the  Name  of  the  Father,  Son, 
and  Holy  Ghost."  The  members  received  the  ab- 
solution on  their  knees,  and  a  loud  "  Amen  "  de- 
clared their  satisfaction.  A  Te  Deum  was  chanted 
immediately  afterwards  in  the  Chapel  of  the  House, 
in  thanksgiving  for  the  reconciliation  now  effected 
(December  6,  1554). 

On  application  from  the  Convocation  to  the  King 
and  Queen,  the  Legate  was  induced  to  grant  a  ratifi- 
cation of  the  possession  of  the  Abbey  lands  by  their 
present  tenants.  He  published  an  instrument 
(December  24,  1554),  declaring:  "1.  That  all 
cathedrals,  colleges,  and  schools  founded  during 
the  schism  should  be  preserved.  2.  That  all  mar- 
riages contracted  within  the  prohibited  degrees,  but 
sanctioned  by  the  existing  laws,  should  be  valid.  3. 
That  all  institutions  into  benefices  should  be  con- 
firmed. 4.  That  all  judicial  processes  should  be  con- 
firmed. 6.  That  all  the  settlements  of  the  lands  of 
any  bishoprics,  monasteries,  or  other  religious  houses, 
might  continue  to  be  held  without  any  impediment 
or  trouble  from  the  ecclesiastical  laws." 


206  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

These  enactments  were  embodied  in  the  same  Act 
of  Parliament  which  restored  the  papal  supremacy. 
The  Cardinal,  not  unnaturally,  wished  to  keep  these 
two  things  apart;  but  the  English  nobility  would 
have  them  united,  taking  care  that  an  act  which 
might  be  quoted  in  support  of  the  claims  of  the 
papacy,  should  also  assert  their  right  to  the  pos- 
sessions alienated  from  the  Church.  This  Act  also 
repealed  all  previous  Acts  inconsistent  with  its  con- 
tents, declared  that  the  title  of  Supreme  Head  of  the 
Church  never  rightfully  belonged  to  the  Crown,  re- 
stored all  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction,  and  suspended 
the  Statute  of  mortmain  for  twenty  years.  It  was 
a  shameful  kind  of  transaction,  although  it  might  be 
urged  in  support  of  the  provision  last  mentioned, 
that  it  gave  the  Church  an  opportunity  of  gaining 
back  some  portion  of  her  lost  property. 

Although  Mary  had  gone  further  in  the  path  of 
reaction  than  her  people  really  liked,  yet  they  had 
become  so  weary  of  perpetual  changes  that  they 
might  finally  have  settled  down  under  the  Roman 
obedience,  but  for  the  persecutions  by  which  it  was 
resolved  to  punish  heretics  and  bring  back  wanderers 
to  the  fold.  As  has  been  said,  it  was  the  Marian 
persecution  which  made  England  Protestant. 

The  blame  for  the  instituting  of  these  most  cruel 
and  unnecessary  barbarities  has  been  laid  upon  dif- 
ferent persons,  more  particularly  upon  Gardiner  and 
Bonner,  and  undoubtedly  they  seem  to  have  entered 
upon  the  work  with  few  compunctions,  and  probably 
regarded  the  sacrifice  of  men  like  Cranmer  with  con- 
siderable satisfaction.     There  seems  no  doubt,  how- 


Source  of  the  Persecution.  207 

ever,  that  the  real  source  of  the  persecutions  was  in 
the  cold  fanaticism  of  Mary,  sustained  by  the  com- 
plete sympathy  and  concurrence  of  her  husband. 

First  of  all,  the  Act  of  Henry  IV.  against  heretics 
was  revived,  the  House  of  Commons  being  eager  to 
do  more  in  that  way  than  they  were  allowed  to  do. 
Next  came  the  Bill  of  Treasons,  by  which  any  one 
who  should  deny  the  King's  right  to  the  title  of  the 
Crown  with  the  Queen's,  was  to  forfeit  all  his  goods, 
and  be  imprisoned  for  life.  It  was  also  enacted  that, 
if  the  Queen  died,  leaving  issue  before  her  children 
had  come  of  age,  the  government  should  be  in  the 
hands  of  the  King,  until  the  son  was  eighteen,  or  the 
daughter  fifteen  years  of  age;  and  the  conspiring 
against  his  life,  during  that  time,  was  to  be  treason. 
Another  Act  was  passed  against  seditious  words,  and 
another  against  the  spreading  of  lying  reports  con- 
cerning any  noblemen,  judges,  or  great  officers. 
Any  who  were  guilty  of  such  offences  were  to  be 
placed  in  the  pillory  and  pay  a  fine  of  a  hundred 
pounds,  or  have  their  ears  cut  off,  and  be  imprisoned 
for  a  month. 

Care  was  taken  to  give  the  Cardinal  a  commission, 
under  the  great  seal,  to  act  as  Legate,  that  it  might 
be  pleaded  that  the  Statute  of  Praemunire  was  not 
violated.  Pole,  too,  was  anxious  to  comport  himself 
in  a  conciliatory  manner  toward  his  fellow-country- 
men, and  was  naturally  a  man  disinclined  to  cruelty 
or  harsh  treatment  of  opponents.  When  the  question 
of  punishing  heresy  came  up,  lie  opposed  extreme 
measures,  saying  that  pastors  should  have  com- 
passion even  upon  the  straying  sheep,  that  bishops 


'>     '•'    ■'.,■  '■■"■r'','f'  t;    -'     "i./    ''U'-'./.l'-lir''"    ;■■■,   '■'.T*7 


208  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

were  fathers  who  should  regard  those  who  went 
astray  as  their  sick  children.  Moreover  he  had  ob- 
served that  measures  of  great  severity,  used  to  bring 
back  the  disobedient,  had  generally  had  a  contrary 
effect.  It  was  more  necessary,  he  thought,  to  have 
a  reformation  of  the  Clergy  than  to  have  a  per- 
secution of  the  heretical.  It  is  said  that  Gar- 
diner  had  been  irritated  by  the  republication  of 
his  book  on  True  Obedience,  written  in  the  reign  of 
Henry  VIII.  in  defence  of  the  royal  supremacy,  and 
took  the  side  of  severity ;  and  that  the  Queen  thought 
that  methods  of  conciliation  and  methods  of  severity 
should  be  tried  together.  At  last  it  was  determined 
to  bring  some  of  the  prominent  reformers  now  in 
prison  to  trial. 

Accordingly  a  commission  was  issued  by  the 
Legate  (January  29,  1555)  to  Bishop  Gardiner  and 
others  named  to  proceed  to  the  trial  of  heretics. 
The  first  to  be  tried  were  Hooper,  formerly  Bishop 
of  Gloucester,  and  Rogers,  Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's, 
who  had  helped  to  protect  Bourne  from  the  fury  of 
the  mob  at  the  beginning  of  this  reign,  and  who  is 
believed  to  be  the  editor  of  the  English  translation 
of  the  Bible,  published  under  the  name  of  Matthew. 
The  real  accusation  against  these  men,  and  nearly 
all  who  suffered  in  this  reign,  was  that  they  denied 
the  ecclesiastical  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  the 
"corporal  presence  of  the  Body  and  Blood  of 
Christ  "in  the  Eucharist.  They  persisted  in  deny- 
ing this  doctrine,  after  being  given  a  night  to  con- 
sider the  case,  and  so  they  were  condemned  as  here- 
tics, degraded,  excommunicated,  and  handed  over  to 


Ejfect  qf  the  Persecuiion,  209 

the  civil  power  to  be  executed.  Rogers  asked  to  be 
allowed  to  see  his  wife  ;  but  he  was  told  she  was  not 
his  wife  and  was  refused.  He  was  offered  a  pardon 
if  he  would  recant,  which  he  refused  to  do,  and  was 
burned  at  Smithfield,  I'obruary  4,  1555. 

The  effect  on  the  people  was  very  different  from 
what  the  originators  of  the  persecutions  had  hoped, 
if  we  may  credit  the  testimony  of  de  Noailles,  the 
French  Ambassador.  "  This  day,"  he  say 3,  "  was 
celebrated  the  confirmation  of  the  alliance  between 
the  Pope  and  this  Kingdom,  by  the  public  and 
solemn  sacrifice  of  a  doctor  and  preacher  named 
Rogers,  who  was  burned  alive  for  holding  Lutheran 
opinions,  persisting  till  death  in  his  sentiments.  At 
this  constancy  the  people  were  so  delighted  that 
they  did  not  fear  to  strengthen  his  courage  by  their 
acclamations,  even  his  own  children  joining,  and 
consoling  him  after  such  a  fashion,  that  it  seemed  as 
though  they  were  conducting  him  to  his  nuptials." 

Hooper  was  taken  to  his  own  cathedral  city  of 
Gloucester,  and  endured  his  lingering  death  with 
great  heroism  and  patience.  The  wood  was  green 
and  the  wind  blew  the  flames  on  one  side,  and  the 
dying  martyr  mingled  his  prayers  to  the  Lord  Jesus 
with  entreaties  for  more  fire.  He  was  nearly  three 
quarters  of  an  hour  burning :  his  last  audible  words 
were :  "  Lord  Jesus,  receive  my  Spirit." 

Sanders,  who  had  persisted  in  preaching  in  spite 
of  the  Queen's  prohibition,  was  sent  to  Coventry  to 
be  burned.  He  was  offered  a  pardon  if  he  would 
recant  his  heresies  ;  but  he  said  he  held  no  heresies ; 
but  only  the  blessed  Gospel  of  Christ,  and  that  he 


210  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

would  never  recanfc.  He  embraced  the  stake  with 
the  words,  "  Welcome  the  Cross  of  Christ,  welcome 
everlasting  life."  Taylor,  who  came  next,  was  in- 
cumbent of  Hadley,  and  when  a  neighboring  priest 
came  to  say  Mass  in  his  Church,  he  went  and  pro- 
tested against  it,  but  was  finally  removed  from  the 
Church.  Gardiner  sent  for  him  and  treated  him  to 
some  of  his  favorite  words  of  abuse ;  and  sent  him 
for  trial  to  the  King's  Bench,  where  he  was  con- 
demned and  sentenced  to  be  burned  in  his  own  parish. 
His  wife  and  children  were  waiting  for  him  in  the 
street,  and  a  touching  scene  took  place,  after  which 
he  bade  them  farewell,  his  wife  declaring  that  she 
would  see  him  at  Hadley.  There  he  found  the 
whole  country  assembled ;  and  "  when  the  people 
saw  his  reverend  and  ancient  face,  with  a  long  white 
beard,  they  burst  out  with  weeping  tears,  and  cried, 
saying,  *  God  save  thee,  good  Dr.  Taylor;  God 
strengthen  thee  and  help  thee  ;  the  Holy  Ghost  com- 
fort thee  I  *  "  He  was  shamefully  struck  and  mal- 
treated by  his  executioners,  so  that  he  fell  dead  into 
the  fire  before  the  flames  had  consumed  him.  These 
four  were  the  first  of  the  Marian  Martyrs,  and  they 
all  died  with  cheerful  confidence  and  resignation. 
Gardiner  was  soon  sick  of  the  business,  especially 
when  he  found  that  the  effect  of  the  burnings  was 
the  very  reverse  of  what  he  had  hoped ;  and  so  he  left 
the  work  to  Bonner,  "who,"  it  is  said,  "undertook 
it  cheerfully." 

One  pleasing  incident  in  connection  with  these 
persecutions  was  the  reconciliation  between  Hooper 
and  Ridley.    It  will  be  remembered  that  Ridley  had 


Ridley  and  Hooper.  211 

vainly  endeavored  to  bring  his  friend  to  a  reason- 
able view  of  the  question  of  the  vestments.  This 
controversy  had  led  to  some  heat  and  even  to  a  de- 
gree of  alienation  between  them ;  but  the  .approach 
of  death  brought  them  to  think  but  little  of  such 
differences.  Hooper  wrote  twice  to  Ridley  during 
his  imprisonment;  and  the  latter  answered  him  as 
soon  as  he  could  find  opportunity,  saying  that  the 
division  between  them  had  been  caused  by  Hooper's 
wisdom  and  his  own  simplicity  ;  but  now  he  assured 
him  how  dearly  he  loved  him  in  the  truth  and  for 
the  truth.  He  bid  him  be  of  good  courage  and  pre- 
pare for  the  day  of  his  dissolution,  after  which  they 
should  triumph  together  in  eternal  glory.  At  the 
same  time  he  expressed  his  joy  and  thankfulness 
for  what  he  had  heard  of  Cranmer's  "godly  and 
fatherly  constancy." 

It  may  seem  surprising  that  these  burnings  occa- 
sioned such  widespread  horror  and  consternation 
throughout  the  country,  when  it  is  remembered  that 
several  had  suffered  the  same  punishment  in  the 
reign  of  Henry  VHI.  and  one  in  the  reign  of  Ed- 
ward. But  it  was  not  only  the  wholesale  character 
of  the  burnings  and  the  cruelties  by  which  they  were 
accompanied,  that  shocked  the  public  sentiment, 
although  these  did  much.  In  the  late  reign  those 
dissenting  from  the  dominant  religion  had  only  been 
sent  to  prison.  Neither  party  had  learned  the  lesson 
of  religious  liberty;  but  the  adherents  of  Rome 
seemed  determined  to  show  that  they  could  carry  on 
the  work  of  persecution  with  a  deadly  thoroughness 
which  their  antagonists  did  not  understand.  ^       .  ,^ 


212  The  AiKjlican  Reformation. 

We  have  referred  more  than  once  to  the  question 
which  has  frequently  been  discussed  as  to  the  origina- 
tors of  the  persecutions ;  and  perhaps  we  may  say  that 
all  the  leaders,  such  as  Gardiner,  and  probably  still 
more  Bonner,  must  be  held  responsible  for  them,  yet 
the  cliief  promoters  of  the  cruel  burnings  were  Philip 
and  Mary ;  and  Gardiner  did  not  hesitate  to  lay  the 
blame  on  the  Queen.  Philip  tried  to  clear  himself 
by  getting  his  chaplain  to  preach  against  capital 
punishment  for  heresy ;  but  there  can  be  no  reason 
to  believe  that  this  was  anything  more  than  a  device 
to  turn  the  odium  away  from  the  King.  As  regards 
the  Queen,  we  have  her  answer  to  the  Council  in 
regard  to  the  punishment  of  heretics,  in  which  she 
says  that  "  it  ought  to  be  done  without  rashness,  not 
leaving  m  the  meantime  to  do  justice  to  such  as,  by 
learning,  would  seem  to  deceive  the  simple,"  clearly 
meaning  that  Cranmer  and  the  bishops  should  be 
looked  to.,  She  concludes  by  saying  that  "  especially 
within  London  I  would  wish  none  to  be  burned  with- 
out some  of  the  Council's  presence,  and  both  there 
and  everywhere  good  sermons  at  the  same  time." 
We  imagine  that  most  people  would  prefer  the 
alleged  ferocity  of  Bonner  to  the  cold  fanaticism  of 
Mary.  This  letter  of  the  Queen's,  we  should  re- 
mark, was  written  towards  the  end  of  1554,  and  be- 
fore the  appointment  of  the  commission  which  was 
in  the  January  following. 

The  burning  of  Taylor  was  in  February.  Ferrar, 
Bishop  of  St.  David's,  was  burned  in  March  at  Car- 
marthen. Then  came  a  pause ;  but  again  in  May 
the  Council  stirs  up  the  bishops  to  proceed  with 


The  Burnings.  213 


their  work,  an  exhortation  which  the  more  tender- 
hearted ignored,  whilst  otliers  acted  upon  it.  In 
June  the  burnings  at  Smithfield  began  again.  It 
would  serve  no  purpose  to  dwell  upon  the  details. 
In  some  of  the  dioceses,  through  tlie  clemency  of  the 
bishops,  none  were  put  to  death,  in  others  many. 
During  the  four  years  (1555-1558)  of  the  persecu- 
tion, one  hundred  and  twenty-eight  were  burned  in 
the  diocese  of  London,  fifty- five  in  Canterbury,  forty- 
six  in  Norwich,  and  much  smaller  numbers  in  the 
other  dioceses,  altogether  two  hundred  and  eighty- 
six,  of  whom  forty-six  were  women.  Under  Tunstall 
of  Durham  and  the  bishops  of  Lincoln,  Carlisle, 
Bath  and  Wells,  Hereford  and  Worcester,  no  burn- 
ings took  place.  It  is  much  to  be  feared  that  Pole, 
who  had  been  suspected  of  sympathy  with  the  Refor- 
mation movement,  and  who  had  no  real  inclination 
to  persecution,  yet  came  over  to  that  side  in  order 
to  prove  at  Rome  his  loyalty  to  the  Church,  and  so 
increase  his  prospects  of  ascending  the  papal  chair, 
which  was  the  object  of  his  ambition.  After  a  time 
tlie  form  of  persecution  became  worse,  the  Queen 
giving  orders  that  recantation  should  not  save  the 
life  of  a  heretic. 

The  trials  of  Ridley,  Latimer,  and  especially  of 
Cranmer  being  for  various  reasons  postponed,  some 
of  those  who  had  escaped  to  the  continent  drew  up 
a  petition  to  the  Queen,  warning  lier  against  the 
evil  of  persecuting  Christians.  They  reminded  her 
that  Cranmer  had  saved  her  life  in  her  father's 
time,  so  that  she  had  good  reason  to  believe  in  his 
attachment  to  herself.     They  pointed  out  that  Gar- 


214  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

diner  and  Bonner  had  written  against  the  supremacy 
of  the  Pope,  and  in  favor  of  the  divorce.  They  said 
that  Christians  were  better  treated  in  Turkey  than 
they  were  in  Christian  England;  and  they  reminded 
Jier  that  the  members  of  her  own  communion  had  not 
been  treated  in  tliis  manner  under  King  Edward ; 
and  finally  that  God  liad  entrusted  her  with  the 
power  of  the  sword  for  the  protection  of  her  people 
while  they  did  well.  The  address  then  warns  the 
nobility  of  their  danger  of  losing  their  lands  (taken 
from  the  Church)  and  their  liberties,  as  was  happen- 
ing in  the  Netherlands.  The  people  are  next 
warned ;  and  the  Queen  is  entreated  to  be  at  least 
as  favorable  to  her  own  subjects  as  she  had  been  to 
foreigners,  and  give  them  leave  to  quit  the  country 
for  foreign  parts. 

An  answer  was  published  in  defence  of  the  Queen's 
action,  in  a  book  entitled,  **A  Defence  of  the  Pro- 
ceedings against  Heretics."  It  was  here  set  forth 
that  the  punishment  of  heretics  was  lawful  and 
necessary  since  the  Jews  were  commanded  to  put 
blasphemers  to  death ;  and  these  heretics  were  guilty 
of  blasphemy,  since  they  called  the  body  of  Clirist  a 
piece  of  bread.  The  heathens  had  persecuted  Chris- 
tians: ought  not  the  zeal  of  those  who  professed  a 
true  religion  to  be  greater?  St.  Peter  had,  by  a  di- 
vine power,  struck  dead  Ananias  and  Sapphira;  aiid 
various  other  examples  were  given  of  the  like  course 
of  proceeding. 

The  work  went  on  until  even  Bonner  grew  weary 
of  killing  without  any  result  save  the  exhibition  of 
the  constancy  of  the  sufferers,  the  growing  sympathy 


Bonner  and  the  Persecution,  216 

of  tlie  people,  and  the  deepening  hatred  of  himself 
and  his  religion.  Consequently,  he  began  to  refuse 
to  investigate  any  further  cases;  but  ho  was  not 
permitted  to  have  his  own  way.  On  May  24  (1555) 
the  King  find  Queen  wrote  to  him,  admonishing  him 
to  have  more  regard  to  the  office  of  a  good  pastor 
and  bishop,  and  to  do  his  best  to  bring  back  the 
wanderers  or  else  to  proceed  against  them  according 
to  law.  Bonner  is  said  to  have  made  up  for  lost 
time. 

A  great  proportion  of  the  Marian  Martyrs  perished 
in  London;  and  it  was  these  terrible  scenes  that 
most  deeply  and  immediately  impressed  tiie  Eng- 
lish people  and  made  the  mass  of  them  profoundly 
hostile  to  the  Roman  Catholic  religion.  It  has 
been  said  that  the  people  of  England  have  never 
got  the  smoke  of  the  fires  of  Smithfield  out  of  their 
nostrils.  But  the  great  tragedy  of  the  reign,  and 
that  which  has  most  affected  posterity  was  the  burn- 
ing of  the  three  bishops  at  Oxford. 

From  the  time  that  Latimer,  Ridley,  and  Cranmer 
were  condenmed  as  heretics  by  Weston  the  prolocu- 
tor at  Oxford,  they  remained  in  daily  expectation 
of  sharing  the  fate  of  the  rest  of  the  condemned. 
But  apparently  there  were  difficulties,  if  there  were 
no  compunctions,  in  the  way.  One  reason  given  was 
the  fact  that  at  the  first  trial  the  country  was  not 
yet  reconciled  to  Rome.  It  is  also  said  that  Gar- 
diner had  not  abandoned  the  hope  of  succeeding  to 
Canterbury,  and  put  off  the  degradation  of  Cranmer, 
which  would  leave  the  see  still  open ;  but  this  seems 
of  the  nature  of  a  guess.    It  is  possible  that  even 


216  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

—    ■  —         ■ ..  - 

Mary  and  Philip  shrank  from  bringing  an  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  to  the  stake.  However  thia 
may  bo,  it  was  eigiiteen  months  after  the  disputation 
before  any  further  action  was  taken,  and  all  tliis 
time  the  bishops  remained  in  their  Oxford  prison. 

At  last,  on  September  7,  Cranmer  was  cited  to 
appear  before  the  Pope,  at  Rome,  within  eighty  days; 
and  at  the  same  time  informed  that  his  Holiness  had 
appointed  Brookes,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  to  try  the 
case.  Along  with  Brookes,  as  Subdelegate  of  the 
Pope,  came  Martin  and  Story  as  royal  commissioners, 
and  summoned  Cranmer  to  appear  before  them  in  the 
University  Church.  The  Archbishop  was  brought 
to  the  Church  on  the  12th  of  September,  doing  rev- 
erence to  the  royal  commissioners,  but  refusing  to 
recognize  the  representative  of  the  Pope.  He  denied 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Court  and  defended  himself 
under  protest.  Brookes  made  a  long  speech,  setting 
forth  Cranmer's  incontinence  in  having  married  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  the  Church,  his  heresy  in  regard 
to  the  Eucharist,  his  rebellion  against  the  Holy  See 
generally,  and  in  particular  his  having  consecrated 
bishops  who  had  not  been  previously  confirmed  by  the 
Pope.  He  was  also  charged  with  having  given  to 
the  King  the  title  of  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church. 

Cranmer  prefaced  his  defence  with  the  recitation 
of  the  Lord's  Prayer  and  the  Apostles'  Creed.  He 
then  declared  that  he  held  to  the  royal  supremacy, 
so  that  he  could  not  accept  that  of  the  Pope,  charg- 
ing the  bishops  of  Rome  with  not  only  encroaching 
upon  the  rights  of  princes,  but  making  laws  con- 
trary to  the  la\y  of  God.    As  examples,   he  n;en- 


Cranmer^a  Trial,  217 


tioned  the  worship  of  God  in  an  unknown  tongue, 
the  withholding  of  the  cu[)  from  the  people,  the  pre- 
tensions to  dispose  of  crowns  ;  all  which  showed  that, 
instead  of  being  Vicars  of  Chiist,  they  were  Anti- 
christs. He  reminded  the  President,  that  he  had 
himself  sworn  to  the  Royal  Supremacy.  Brookes 
reported  that  it  was  to  Henry  VHI.  and  at  the  in- 
stigation of  Cranmer;  but  Cranmer  replied  that  it 
was  done  in  the  time  of  Warham,  his  predecessor; 
and  that  the  doctrine  had  received  the  approval  of 
the  universities,  Brookes  being  then  a  doctor  signing 
with  the  rest.  He  was,  therefore,  in  no  way  re- 
sponsible for  what  had  been  done  before  his  time. 
Martin,  then,  took  part  in  the  proceedings,  alleg- 
ing the  various  inconsistencies  of  Cranmer.  He  re- 
minded hira  of  his  oath  to  the  Pope  which  did  not 
prevent  his  submission  to  Henry  VHI.  and  charged 
him  with  perjury  as  the  price  to  be  paid  for  his  Arch- 
bishopric. He  also  reminded  him  of  having  con- 
demned men  for  heresy  in  denying  Transubstantiation, 
which  he  now  denied  himself.  The  Archbishop  de- 
clared how  reluctantly  he  had  come  into  his  high 
office,  stating  that,  after  the  offer  of  it,  he  had  re- 
mained in  Germany  for  seven  weeks,  hoping  that  the 
King  might  forget  him  or  change  his  mind.  He  ex- 
jjlained,  in  a  manner  which  has  never  quite  satisfied 
his  defenders,  the  sense  in  which  he  took  the  oath  to 
the  Pope,  when  ho  received  the  pallium  from 
Rome ;  and  he  said  he  had  been  guilt}?-  of  no  incon- 
sistency in  connection  with  the  Eucharist ;  for  he 
had  held  the  Corporal  presence  when  he  condemned 
Lambert,  and  until  the  time  whea  Ridley  convinced. 


218  27ie  Anglican  Reformation. 

him  of  his  error.  They  further  objected  to  his  mar- 
riage, and  keeping  his  wife  secretly  in  King  Henry's 
time,  and  openly  in  the  time  of  Kiug  Edward.  He 
confessed  and  justified  his  marriage  as  a  bishop,  and 
retorted  that  this  was  better  than  lying  with  other 
men's  wives  as  some  priests  did. 

The  controversy  went  on  with  repetition  of  the 
same  charges  and  arguments  on  both  sides.  Wit- 
nesses were  examined  with  reference  to  the  state- 
ments made  by  Cranmer  in  the  discussion  before 
Weston  in  the  Schools.  In  answer  to  the  charge 
that  he  had  advised  the  King  to  adopt  the  title  of 
Supreme  Head  of  the  Church,  he  said  that  by  this 
he  intended  simply  to  declare  that  the  King  was  over 
all  persons  and  causes  supreme,  whether  civil  or 
ecclesiastical.  As  Cranmer  could  be  sentenced  only 
by  the  Pope,  he  was,  at  the  end  of  the  trial,  conveyed 
back  to  his  prison,  until  the  decision  of  the  Roman 
see  should  arrive. 

The  trial  of  Latimer  and  Ridley  took  place  soon 
afterwards.  A'  they  were  merely  bishops,  they  were 
tried  by  a  con:  ision  from  the  legate,  consisting  of 
Bishops  White  of  Lincoln,  Brookes  of  Gloucester, 
and  Holyman  of  Bristol.  The  trial  was  held  in  the 
Divinity  School  at  Oxford,  September  80,  1555. 
When  Ridley  heard  that  the  Court  was  held  by  com- 
mission fj'om  the  Pope's  legate,  he  put  on  his  cap,  so 
as  not  to  seem  to  show  respect  to  an  authority  vvliich 
he  did  not  recognize.  By  this  he  explained  that  he 
meant  no  disrespect  for  the  Cardinal  personally,  as  a 
man  descended  from  the  royal  family  and  endued 
with  much  learning  and  virtue;  but  as  legate  he 


Trial  of  Ridley  and  Latimer.  219 

could  not  recognize  him.  Consequently  one  of  the 
beadles  had  to  remove  his  cap.  liishop  White  then 
made  an  appeal  to  him  to  recognize  the  supremacy 
of  the  see  of  Peter  upon  which  Christ  had  built  his 
Church,  the  preeminence  of  which  had  also  been 
recognized  by  the  Fathers.  Ridley  acknowledged 
tliat  the  bishops  of  Rome  had  been  held  in  high 
esteem  on  account  both  of  the  greatness  of  the  city 
and  the  excellence  of  the  occupants  of  the  see ;  but 
they  had  been  recognized  only  as  patriarchs  of  the 
West.  Other  questions  were  raised  such  as  had  been 
discussed  before,  on  the  Eucharist  and  other  subjects. 
Ridley,  while  giving  the  same  answers,  guarded  him- 
self against  acknowledging  the  authority  of  his  judges. 
Latimer  was  required  to  go  through  a  similar  pro- 
cess. He  was  entreated  to  abandon  his  errors,  and 
return  to  the  Unity  of  the  Catholic  Church.  Tliis 
appeal  roused  him  from  his  seeming  indifference. 
*'  My  Lord,"  ho  answered  to  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
*'  I  confess  a  Catholic  Church,  spread  throughout  the 
whole  world,  in  which  no  man  may  err,  without 
unity  with  which  Church  no  man  may  be  saved ;  but 
I  know  perfectly  that  this  Church  is  in  all  the  world, 
and  hath  not  its  foundation  in  Rome  only,  as  you 
say."  He  was  offered  a  night  to  reconsider  his 
reply ;  but  he  asked  to  be  troubled  no  more  on  such 
subjects.  They  were  then  sent  back  to  prison  for 
one  night  to  consider  whether  they  would  recant  or 
not.  As  they  still  adhered  to  the  answers  they  had 
given,  they  were  declared  to  be  obstinate  heretics, 
ordered  to  be  degraded  and  to  be  handed  over  to  the 
civil  power  (October  1,  1655),     It  is  well  to  remem- 


220  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

■       P      '  -      ■    ■■  I  ■     -—   —  i.i  .^    ..  I.      I  I  ,  ,  I  ■■.,,-        I        I   I.  ,   m.  ■« 

ber  the  grounds  on  which  this  condemnation  was 
pronounced.  They  were  threefold :  First,  that  they 
had  denied  that  the  true  and  natural  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ  were  present  in  the  Eucharist; 
Secondly,  That  they  had  affirmed  the  substance  of 
bread  and  wine  to  remain  after  consecration;  Thirdly, 
That  they  had  denied  the  Mass  to  be  a  Sacrifice  for 
the  living  and  the  dead. 

Attempts  were  still  made  to  induce  Ridley  to  re- 
cant and  accept  the  mercy  offered  to  him ;  but  he 
told  them  it  was  useless  to  continue  such  talk.  lie 
had  no  doubt  about  his  doctrine,  he  would  maintain 
it  **  as  long  as  his  tongue  could  wag,"  and,  if  neces- 
sary, he  would  seal  it  with  his  blood.  At  the  same 
time  he  desired  the  friendly  offices  of  the  Bishop  of 
Gloucester  on  behalf  of  his  sister  and  her  husband 
who  had  been  turned  out  of  his  poor  benefice  in  the 
diocese  of  London  by  Bonner.  The  Bishop  promised 
to  do  what  he  could.  The  ceremony  of  degradation 
took  place  on  the  15th  of  October. 

On  the  evening  of  that  day,  we  are  told,  Ridley 
was  very  joyful,  and  invited  his  hosts,  the  Mayor  of 
Oxford  and  his  wife,  to  be  at  his  wedding  next  day ; 
and  when  the  Mayor's  wife  wept,  he  told  her  that, 
although  his  breakfast  might  be  sharp,  he  was  sure 
that  his  supper  would  be  sweet.  Next  morning  the 
two  bishops  were  led  forth  to  the  place  of  execution, 
close  to  Balliol  College,  near  the  spot  where  the 
Martyr's  Memorial,  raised  to  their  memory,  now 
stands.  One  disappointment  awaited  them.  As 
they  passed  the  prison  in  which  Cranmer  was  con- 
fined, they  looked  up  in  hope  of  seeing  him.     At 


Trial  of  Ridley  and  Latimer,  221 

that  moment,  however,  he  was  engaged  in  discussion 
with  a  friar ;  but  afterwards  he  saw  that  they  had 
passed,  and  knelt  down  and  prayed  that  God  would 
strengthen  them  for  the  trial  before  them. 

When  the  two  bishops  came  to  the  stake,  they  em- 
braced each  other,  kissed  the  stake,  and  offered  earn- 
est prayer,  Ridley  saying  to  Latimer:  "  Be  of  good 
heart,  brother,  for  God  will  either  assuage  the  fury 
of  the  flame,  or  enable  us  to  abide  it."  The  sermon, 
usual  on  these  occasions,  was  preached  by  Dr.  Smith, 
a  Vicar  of  Bray  of  the  period,  who  had  always  ac- 
cepted the  current  faith  and  rejected  it  when  it  was 
out  of  fashion.  He  took  for  his  text  the  words  of 
St.  Paul  (1  Cor.  xiii.  8) :  "  Though  I  give  my  body 
to  be  burned,  and  have  not  charity,  it  profiteth  me 
nothing."  The  sermon  happily  lasted  only  a  quarter 
of  an  hour ;  but  in  that  time  the  preacher  contrived 
to  insult  the  Martyrs  to  the  utmost,  comparing  their 
death  for  heresy  to  the  hanging  of  himself  by  Judas. 

Ridley  seemed  inclined  to  make  answer  to  the 
preacher ;  but  he  was  told  by  the  Vice-Chancellor 
that  he  could  not  be  allowed  to  speak,  unless  he 
meant  to  recant.  He  answered,  that  he  could  never 
deny  his  Lord  ;  d,nd  that  he  committed  himself  to 
God,  whose  will  would  be  done.  Then  their  gar- 
ments were  taken  off,  and  the  fagots  lighted,  when 
Latimer  uttered,  to  his  brother  sufferer,  those  words 
so  often  repeated  and  never  to  be  forgotten :  "  Be 
of  good  cheer.  Master  Ridley,  and  play  the  man  ; 
for  we  sliall  this  day  light  such  a  candle  in  England, 
as  I  trust,  by  God's  grace,  shall  never  be  put  out." 
He  died  almost  immediately   and  apparently  with 


222  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

little  pnin,  the  gunpowder  which  had  been  hung 
about  him  having  ignited  at  once.  It  was  different 
with  Ridley.  The  fagots  of  wood  had  been  piled 
closely  round  him,  in  order  to  hasten  his  burning; 
but  the  pressure  prevented  them  from  catching  fire ; 
so  that  his  feet  and  legs  were  consumed  before  the 
vitals  were  touched  ;  and  he  was  heard  to  say  that 
he  could  not  burn.  One  of  the  bystanders,  however, 
threw  down  the  pile  of  fagots,  so  that  the  flame 
leaped  up  and  ignited  the  bag  of  gunpowder  which 
had  been  attached  to  his  neck  and  thus  ended  his 
sufferings. 

Ridley  was  the  youngest  and  the  most  scholarly 
of  the  three  martyrs.  He  was  only  about  fifty-five 
years  old  at  the  time  of  his  death.  He  had  come 
gradually  to  the  opinions  which  he  professed ;  but 
there  is  no  sign  of  insincerity  or  of  wavering  in  his 
latter  days.  His  influence  over  King  Edward  was 
altogether  for  good.  He  largely  determined  the 
theological  views  of  Cranmer ;  and  his  death  was 
the  death  of  a  martyr  and  hero.  Latimer,  so  often 
spoken  of  as  "old,"  must  have  seemed  more  aged 
than  he  was ;  for  at  his  death  he  was  only  about 
sixty-five  years  of  age.  He,  like  the  others,  had 
come  by  degrees  to  the  reception  of  the  doctrines  of 
the  Reformation  ;  and  he  had  resigned  his  bishopric 
after  the  passing  of  the  Six  Articles.  Declining  to 
be  reinstated  under  Edward  VI.  he  had  been  a  great 
power  in  England  as  a  preacher.  His  alleged  coarse- 
ness did  not  interfere  with  his  acceptableness  to  the 
people  at  large  ;  and  his  sincerity  and  courage  were 
unquestionable.    At  the  beginning  of  Mary's  reign 


-"rxp>5^ 


Death  of  Gardiner.  223 

he  might  have  escaped  to  the  continent;  but  de- 
clined to  do  so.  The  work  of  the  16th  of  October, 
1555,  was  about  the  worst  that  Mary  and  Rome  could 
have  done.  A  more  august  victim  remained ;  but 
the  martyrdom  of  Latimer  and  Ridley  will  always 
awaken  bitter  memories  and  reflections  in  the  minds 
of  Englishmen. 

Two  events  of  importance  belong  to  this  period, 
the  meeting  of  a  new  Parliament,  October  21,  and 
the  deatli  of  Gardiner  on  November  12,  1555.  Gar- 
diner, who  was  Lord  Chancellor,  was  able  to  be 
present  on  the  day  of  opening,  when  he  spoke  in 
favor  of  a  measure  of  restitution  of  Church  prop- 
erty, proposed  by  the  Queen.  He  was  in  bad  health 
at  the  time  ;  and  stories  are  told  of  his  having  suf- 
fered from  his  putting  off  his  dinner  hour  on  the 
day  of  the  death  of  Ridley  and  Latimer  until  he 
should  hear  that  they  had  actually  been  burned.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  he  died  about  three  weeks  after  his 
last  appearance  in  the  House  of  Lords,  and  his  loss 
to  tlie  Queen  was  considerable.  He  is  said  to  have 
died  in  a  very  religious  frame  of  mind,  saying,  "  I 
have  erred  with  Peter ;  but  have  not  wept  with 
Peter,"  an  expression  which  is  quoted  by  his  friends 
as  an  evidence  of  his  piety,  by  his  enemies  as  a 
proof  of  his  impenitence.  On  the  whole  we  must 
helieve  Gardiner  to  have  been  a  man  of  ability,  not 
more  cruel  than  the  average  man  of  his  age,  ambi- 
tious but  not  specially  greedy  for  money.  If  he  fell 
in  with  the  Queen's  determination  to  persecute,  he 
seems  to  have  got  sooner  tired  of  burning  than  most 
of  his  contemporaries. 


/ 


224  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

In  the  Parliament  of  October,  1555,  as  has  been  re- 
marked, Gardiner  had  brought  forward  Queen 
Mary's  proposal  to  restore  to  the  Church  all  ecclesi- 
astical property  that  had  been  vested  in  the  Crown. 
After  his  death  she  sent  for  a  deputation  from  each 
house,  and  explained  her  wish  and  her  reasons.  The 
Bill  passed  the  Lords  with  only  two  dissentient 
voices;  but  was  strongly  opposed  in  the  Commons, 
one  hundred  and  ninety-three  voting  for  it,  and  one 
hundred  and  twenty-six  against  it.  By  this  Act 
tenths,  first-fruits,  rectories,  impropriations,  manors, 
glebe  lands,  and  tithes,  to  the  amount  of  .£60,000  a 
year,  were  restored  to  the  Church  and  placed  at  the 
disposal  of  the  Cardinal-legate  for  the  augmentation 
of  small  benefices,  the  support  of  preachers,  and  the 
providing  of  exhibitions  for  scholars  in  the  univer- 
sities. It  is  probable  that  the  opposition  to  the 
measure  was  the  result  of  some  apprehension  that  the 
other  ecclesiastical  property,  which  was  now  held  by 
laymen,  might  be  restored  in  like  manner  in  spite  of 
the  pledges  given  when  Pole  came  to  England  as 
papal  legate.  An  assurance  was  given,  however, 
that  no  such  interference  was  intended. 

In  the  Convocation  of  the  same  period  Pole  intro- 
duced a  number  of  measures  for  the  discipline  of  the 
Clergy  and  the  reformation  of  the  Church  ;  appar- 
ently finding  greater  satisfaction  in  the  improvement 
of  the  state  and  work  of  the  Church  than  in  the  per- 
secution of  heretics.  He  did  his  best  to  put  a  stop 
to  non  residence  and  pluralities.  He  counselled  the 
bishops  to  be  careful  in  their  examination  of  candi- 
dates for  confirmation,  and  to  promote  those  who 


Pole  and  Cranmer.  225 

were  the  most  deserving  ;  and  in  this  respect  liis  own 
practice  was  an  example  to  others.  He  also  took  in 
hand  to  set  up  seminaries  in  the  different  dioceses 
throughout  the  country. 

Craumer's  case  had  been  referred  to  the  Pope,  and 
after  it  had  been  heard  by  him,  the  Archbishop  was 
excommunicated  December  4,  and  by  a  Bull  dated 
December  11,  1555,  Pole  was  collated  to  the  Arch- 
bishopric of  Canterbury.  Bisliops  Bonner  of  Lon- 
don and  Thirlby  of  Ely  were  appointed  papal  dele- 
gates to  carry  out  the  degradation  of  Cranmer.  To 
Thirlby  the  duty  was  a  most  painful  one.  He  had 
been  on  terms  of  affectionate  friendship  with  Cran- 
mer, and  had  saved  himself  and  his  bishopric  by  re- 
cantation. Throughout  the  whole  proceedings 
Thirlby  showed  the  deepest  sorrow,  whilst  Bonner  is 
said  to  have  behaved  with  great  insolence. 

On  the  14th  of  February  Cranmer  appeared  before 
the  Commissioners  who  were  seated  on  a  platform 
raised  in  front  of  the  high  altar  in  Christ  Church 
Cathedral.  The  commission  was  read,  declaring  that 
the  case  had  been  examined  in  Rome,  and  counsel 
heard  on  both  sides;  and  finally  investing  the  Com- 
missioners with  full  authority  to  deprive,  degrade, 
and  excommunicate  Thomas,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury; and,  having  done  so,  to  deliver  him  over  to  the 
secular  power. 

In  the  yard  adjoining  the  Church  stood  a  table, 

covered  with  Episcopal  robes,  made  of  canvas,  with 

which  they  clothed  him,  putting  his  pastoral  staff  in 

his  hand.     Perhaps  the  most  disgraceful  part  of  the 

proceedings  was  the  heartless  harangue  of  Bonner 
O 


226  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

jeering  at  Cranmer  in  his  humiliation.  "  This  is  the 
man" — he  went  on — each  sentence  commencing  with 
those  words:  "This  is  the  man  that  ever  despised 
the  Pope's  Holiness,  and  now  is  to  be  judged  by  him. 
This  is  the  man  who  hath  pulled  down  so  many 
Churches,  and  now  is  come  to  be  judged  in  a 
Church.  This  is  the  man  that  condemned  the 
Blessed  Sacrament  of  the  Altar,  and  now  is  come  to 
be  condemned  before  the  Blessed  Sacrament  hanging 
over  the  altar.  This  is  the  man  that,  like  Lucifer, 
sat  in  the  place  of  Christ  upon  an  altar,  to  judge 
others,  and  now  is  come  before  an  altar  to  be  judged 
himself." 

It  is  always  difficult  to  know  how  far  an  accused 
person  should  protest  against  a  wrong  done  to  him, 
or  suffer  in  silence.  Cranmer  did  not  usually  err  on 
the  side  of  contention  or  wrangling :  his  disposition 
was  gentle  and  yielding.  But  on  several  occasions, 
during  these  proceedings,  his  indignation  broke  forth, 
and  he  gave  something  like  the  lie  to  his  accusers. 
In  regard  to  the  charge  of  sitting  upon  an  altar,  he 
protested  that  he  simply  sat  upon  the  platform  pre- 
pared for  him  by  Bonner  and  his  officers ;  and 
whether  there  was  an  altar  under  it  or  not,  he  did 
not  know  or  suspect. 

Bonner  was  not  likely  to  be  conciliated  by  con- 
tradiction, and  broke  out  more  fiercel}'^,  when  Bishop 
Thirlby  was  seen  pulling  at  his  sleeve  to  make  him 
sit  down ;  and  it  is  said  that  afterward  he  rebuked 
Bonner  for  a  breach  of  promise  in  reviling  the 
prisoner.  Even  the  spectators  were  scandalized  at 
his  unfeeling  conduct,  and  vented  their  displeasure 


Degradation  of  Cranmer.  227 

in  murmurs,  so  that  Bonner  at  last  seemed  to  be 
made  to  feel  the  indecency  of  his  conduct. 

It  was  useless  to  continue  the  conflict.  Cranmer 
indeed  protested  that  an  archbishop  could  not  be 
tried  by  two  bishops,  who  could  not  have  the  right 
to  remove  the  pall  from  the  neck  of  the  Metro- 
politan to  whom  they  had  sworn  allegiance.  The 
answer  was  very  simple :  they  did  not  judge  him  as 
his  suffragans ;  it  was  as  the  delegates  of  the  Pope 
that  they  degraded  him.  Cranmer  bid  them  proceed 
with  their  work :  he  would  give  them  no  trouble,  he 
said,  for  with  this  gear  he  had  long  since  done. 
When  they  had  completed  the  divesting  of  the 
Archbishop  by  taking  his  cross  from  his  hand,  he 
drew  from  his  sleeve  a  document  in  which  he  ap- 
pealed from  the  judgment  of  the  Pope  to  that  of  the 
next  general  Council,  desiring  that  the  appeal  should 
be  received.  In  reciting  the  judgment  of  Rome,  the 
bishops  had  informed  him  that  he  was  condemned 
omni  appellafione  remota ;  they  could  now  only  re- 
peat what  they  had  been  instructed  to  say,  and  ex- 
plain that  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  receive  the 
appeal.  Against  this  decision  Cranmer  remon- 
strated ;  and  Thirlby  here  fairly  broke  down,  and 
received  the  appeal,  in  opposition  to  his  instructions. 
He  then  went  on  to  implore  the  Archbishop  to  re- 
consider the  case.  If  he  would  recant,  he  promised 
that  he  would  do  his  best  to  obtain  a  pardon  for  him 
from  the  King  and  Queen. 

At  this  time  Cranmer  had  evidently  no  thought  of 
making  any  conditions  for  the  saving  of  his  life. 
He  could  not  help  being  moved  by  Thirlby 's  appeal, 


228  The  AnjUcan  Reformation. 

but  he  was  strong  in  his  convictions  already  so 
clearly  expressed;  and  so  the  process  went  on. 
After  being  stripped  of  his  vestments,  he  was  re- 
quired to  kneel  down  before  Bonner,  and  the  hair 
round  his  head  was  clipped  short.  Then  Bonner 
scraped  the  tips  of  his  fingers  in  token  that  the  sacred 
oil  should  no  longer  be  found  on  them.  He  was 
then  clothed  in  mean  apparel  and  handed  over  to  the 
secular  arm.  Again  Bonner  showed  his  coarseness 
and  violence  by  telling  Cranmer  that  he  was  no 
longer  "  My  Lord  "  and  by  speaking  of  him  as  "  this 
gentleman  here." 

Cranmer's  appeal  has  been  preserved.  It  sets 
forth,  under  six  heads,  that  he  had  no  intention  of 
speaking  anything  against  the  Holy  Catholic  Church ; 
and  (1)  that  he  had  no  power,  being  in  prison,  to 
send  a  proctor  to  Rome;  (2)  that  he  had  no  oppor- 
tunity of  procuring  the  aid  of  counsel ;  (3)  that  he 
disowned  the  papal  authority,  as  not  merely  against 
his  oath,  but  also  as  being  contradictory  to  the  Eng- 
lish Constitution ;  and  so  forth.  And  then,  turning 
to  the  other  principal  matter  on  which  he  had  been 
condemned,  the  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament,  he  pro- 
tested that  he  had  never  meant  to  teach  anything 
contrary  to  the  Word  of  God,  or  the  Holy  Catholic 
Church  of  Christ;  but  simply  that  doctrine  which 
had  been  set  forth  by  the  most  holy  and  learned 
fathers  and  martyrs  of  the  Church  from  the  begin- 
ning. The  real  meaning  of  the  accusation  brought 
against  him,  he  said,  was  that  he  did  not  allow  the 
modern  doctrine  of  the  Sacrament,  and  because  he 
would  not  consent  to  words  unauthorized  by  Scrip- 


Hope  of  Escape.  229 


ture  and  unknown  to  the  ancient  Fathers,  but  newly 
brought  in  and  invented  by  men,  overthrowing  the 
old  and  pure  religion. 

It  was  certainly  Thirlby  who  first  excited  in  the 
mind  of  Cranmer  the  thought,  perhaps  the  hope,  that 
his  life  might  be  saved,  if  he  would  make  some  con- 
cession to  the  dominant  system.  Ridley  and  Lati- 
mer had  been  offered  their  lives,  if  they  would 
recant.  Why  not  Cranmer?  And  Thirlby  entreated 
him  to  consider  the  matter  and  promised  to  do  his  very 
best  on  his  behalf.  He  had  no  warrant  for  this  at- 
tempt. There  is  no  reason  whatever  for  supposing 
that  the  Queen  ever  had  a  thought  of  giving  Cran- 
mer his  life.  Philip  was  not  with  her  at  this  time. 
The  abdication  not  only  of  the  Empire,  but  of  the 
Kingdoms  of  Spain  and  the  Netherlands,  by  his 
father,  the  Emperor  Charles  V.,  required  the  pres- 
ence of  Philip  on  the  Continent,  as  he  was  about  to 
succeed  to  the  hereditary  possessions  of  the  Crown  of 
Spain  and  the  Duchy  of  Burgundy.  But  Mary  and 
Philip  were  of  one  mind  in  the  matter  of  the  de- 
struction of  heretics.  And  the  Queen  had  long 
nursed  the  resolve  to  punish  the  arch-heretic, 
Thomas  Cranmer,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  He 
had  obtained  his  great  position  principally  by  sup- 
porting her  father's  resolve  to  put  away  her  mother. 
He  had  defended  Henry's  claim  to  be  Head  of  the 
Church,  setting  aside  the  pretensions  of  the  papal 
see.  He  had  been  the  ringleader  in  the  Protestant 
reforms  under  her  brother  Edward.  As  a  daughter, 
as  a  vehement  adherent  of  the  papal  system,  she  was 
constrained  to  bring  this  evil  doer  to  justice.    The 


230  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

delay  arose  from  such  causes  as  liave  been  indicated, 
not  from  any  thought  of  mercy  on  tlie  part  of  the 
Queen. 

At  the  same  time  it  seems  probable  that  Cranmer 
had  hopes  of  his  life  being  spared,  a  "d  he  wanted  it 
to  be  spared.  He  was  advanced  in  years,  he  had 
come  to  the  age  of  sixty-seven,  and  he  was  older  than 
his  years.  Sorrows  of  many  kinds  and  a  hard  im- 
prisonment of  two  years  and  a  half  had  worn  and 
wasted  him ;  and  although,  at  times,  his  youthful 
vigor  and  strength  seemed  to  return  to  him,  yet 
more  and  more  he  became  irresolute  and  uncertain. 
Cranmer  had  never  been  a  self-reliant  man :  he  had 
been  the  servant  of  the  imperious  Henry  hi  almost 
all  things ;  at  the  utmost  only  protesting  against 
what  he  disapproved,  yet  ultimately  submitting. 
And  indeed  such  submission  was  not  merely  an  act 
of  personal  weakness,  but  the  expression  of  a  prin- 
ciple which  he  frequently  set  forth.  Whether  Cran- 
mer was  precisely  an  Erastian  we  will  not  attempt 
to  determine ;  but  he  certainly  held  very  high  views 
of  the  royal  prerogative ;  and  it  is  quite  likely  that 
he  was  plied  with  this  argument  in  his  hour  of  weak- 
ness. 

The  history  of  Cranmer's  last  days  is  sad  and 
humiliating.  There  is  no  justification  for  the  brutal 
violence  with  which  ho  has  been  assailed  by  men 
who  could  not  possibly  be  subjected  to  the  same 
temptations  and  trials ;  nor  was  Cranmer  a  man  who 
deserved  such  treatment  at  the  hands  of  his  worst 
enemies.  He  was  a  man  of  eminent  purity  of  life, 
of  unfeigned  piety,  of  great  meekness  and  gentleness 


Cranmer^s  IJumiliation.  281 

towards  those  who  opposed  him ;  and  these  qualities 
might  have  warded  off  the  bitter  words  which  have 
been  spoken  against  him.  But  it  is  undeniable  that 
J»e,  like  other  men,  had  "  the  defects  of  his  qualities  ;  " 
and  his  advanced  years  and  his  lengthy  imprison- 
ment had  broken  down  the  strength  of  his  will. 

When  Thirlby  took  in  hand  to  obtain  Cranmer's 
recantation  and  save  his  life,  he  induced  Bonner  to 
take  the  view  that  the  recantation  of  Cranmer  would 
be  better  than  his  death.  It  was  by  slow  degrees 
tiiat  they  led  the  condemned  man  along  the  path  of 
humiliation,  beginning  with  the  signing  of  compara- 
tively innocent  concessions  and  ending  with  declara- 
tions that  Cranmer  must  liave  known  to  be  untrue. 

In  his  first  submission  he  simply  declared  his  will- 
ingness to  "  take  the  Pope  to  be  the  Chief  head  of 
this  Church  of  England,  as  far  as  God's  Laws,  and 
the  laws  and  customs  of  this  realm  will  permit,"  a 
form  of  words  which  might  be  defended.  More  was 
required ;  and  in  his  second  submission,  he  declared 
that  he  submitted  to  "  the  Pope,  Supreme  head  of 
the  Church,  and  unto  the  King  and  Queen's  Majes- 
ties, and  unto  all  their  laws  and  ordinances."  Here, 
we  see,  he  saves  himself  from  the  shame  of  acknowl- 
edging the  Pope  by  sheltering  himself  under  the 
authority  of  the  Sovereign.  In  his  third  submission 
he  expanded  the  same  thought  at  greater  length,  but 
without  any  essential  change  of  meaning.  But,  so 
far,  he  had  not  touched  the  question  of  the  Eu- 
charist. And  therefore  in  his  next  submission,  he 
was  required  to  give  satisfaction  on  that  point ;  and 
he  did  so  in  the  following  fashion.    After  declaring 


232  Tlie  AiKjUcan  Reformation. 

that  he  believed  "  as  the  Catholic  Church  doth  be- 
lieve, and  hath  ever  believed  from  the  beginning;  " 
he  added,  "  as  concerning  the  Sacraments  of  the 
Church,  I  believe  unfeignedly  in  all  points  as  the 
said  Catholic  Church  doth  and  hath  believed  from 
the  beginning  of  the  Christian  religion."  We  sup- 
pose that  a  casuist  might  defend  the  signing  of  a 
doctrine  thus  worded,  on  the  ground  that  it  did  not, 
in  the  mind  of  the  subscriber,  represent  any  opinion 
which  ha  did  not  hold.  Ac  the  same  time,  there  can 
be  no  question  that  it  was  intended  to  convey  a  false 
impression  .  others.  It  was  intended  to  satisfy  the 
Queen  ;  and  Cranmer's  real  opinion  would  not  have 
satisfied  her.  It  was,  therefore,  the  act  of  a  man 
who  was  trying  to  save  his  life  at  the  expense  of  his 
conscience. 

So  great  hope  was  now  entertained  of  his  being 
spared  that  he  was  actually  removed  from  the  prison 
to  the  Deanery  of  Christ  Church,  and  treated  with 
great  kindness ;  and  although  still  watched,  he  en- 
joyed a  large  amount  of  liberty.  But  it  does  not 
appear  that  they  had  any  sanction  from  the  Queen 
for  this  change  of  treatment.  It  has  been  alread}'' 
mentioned  that  Cranmer  had  rendered  great  services 
to  Mary  during  her  father's  lifetime ;  and  it  does  not 
appear  that  this  narrow-minded  and  conscientious 
woman  was  specially  hard  or  cruel ;  but  she  was  a 
fanatic,  and  she  hoped  that,  in  return  for  her  zeal, 
God  would  reward  her  with  blessings  that  she  sorely 
coveted — the  love  of  her  cold-hearted  husband,  whom 
she  worshipped,  and  an  heir  who  might  cem.ent  the 
union  between  England  and  Spain. 


Cranmer*s  Degradation.  233 

It  soon  became  known  that  Cranmer's  submissions 
had  not  gone  far  enough.  One  might  think  he  had 
humbled  himself  sufficiently ;  but  he  had  gone  so 
far  that  it  became  easy  to  go  all  the  way  that  was 
demanded  of  him.  Accordingly  in  his  next  submis- 
sion he  declared  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  be  "  the 
highest  Bishop  and  Pope,  and  Christ's  vicar,  unto 
whom  all  Cinistian  people  ought  to  be  subject ; " 
and  in ''the  Sacrament  of  the  Altar  "he  believed 
and  worshipped  "  the  very  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ 
contained  most  truly  under  the  forms  of  bread  and 
wine ; "  and  much  besides,  but  that  was  enough. 
One  more,  the  sixth  recantation,  contained  an  ex- 
pansion of  the  fifth  with  a  deeper  self-humiliation 
and  an  expression  of  penitence.  In  this  submission 
he  confessed  the  great  sins  of  which  he  had  been 
guilty  in  being,  like  Saul,  a  persecutor  of  the 
Church.  In  the  previous  document  he  had  given  up 
all  that  was  distinctive  in  his  reformed  teaching,  the 
"  heresies  and  errors  of  Luther  and  Zwingli,"  and 
had  declared  his  belief  not  only  in  Transubstanti- 
ation,  but  in  Purgatory,  Prayers  for  the  dead,  and 
Invocation  of  Saints.  In  this  last  confession  he 
specially  lamented  his  offences  '*  against  King  Henry 
VIII.  and  especially  against  Queen  Catharine,  his 
wife,"  and  all  the  evils  which  had  flowed  from  his 
being  "cause  and  author  of  the  divorce."  On  ac- 
count of  all  these  things  he  humbled  himself  before 
God  and  the  Vicar  of  Christ  and  the  King  and 
Queen.     There  was  no  deeper  fall  possible. 

The  proceeding  was  discreditable  to  all  concerned; 
to  Cranraer  of  course ;  but  still  more,  to  those  who 


234  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

made  him  believe  that  by  such  submission  he  would 
save  his  life. 

When  Cranmer  was  required  to  read  aloud  his 
recantation  at  the  place  of  execution,  he  was  ap- 
parently under  the  impression  that  his  being  con- 
veyed thither  was  a  mere  form,  and  that  his  life 
would  be  spared.  It  has  been  asserted  that  his 
thought  of  recanting  his  recantation  came  to  him 
only  when  he  saw  that  he  must  die.  There  is  no 
evidence  or  likelihood  of  such  a  thing.  If  we  must 
do  justice  to  the  Queen  by  admitting  that  she  did 
not  break  faitli  with  Cranmer,  we  must  do  equal  jus- 
tice to  the  sincerity  and  courage  of  tlie  Archbishop 
in  the  last  hours  of  his  life.  One  of  the  Spanish 
doctors  who  had  been  the  chief  instrument  in  buoy- 
ing him  up  with  the  hope  of  life,  came  to  him  on 
the  21st  of  March,  to  prepare  him  for  death.  At  the 
same  time  a  seventh  document  was  given  to  him, 
completing  his  previous  submissions,  which  he  was 
expected  to  read  at  the  stake.  Roman  Catholic  his- 
torians believe  that  Cranmer  was  ready  to  adopt  this 
document,  if  his  life  could  have  been  saved.  Such  a 
theory  is  highly  improbable.  It  is  far  more  likely 
that  he  prepared  his  final  confession  and  determined 
to  recite  it  in  public,  even  if  it  should  deprive  him  of 
his  last  chance  of  life. 

It  was  arranged  that  the  sermon  should  be 
preached  and  Cranmer's  final  submission  made  in 
the  University  Church  on  the  way  from  the  prison  to 
the  stake  whicli  had  been  fixed  on  tlie  spot  on  wliich 
Ridley  and  Latimer  had  suffered.  Cranmer  was 
placed  by  himself  on  a  platform  facing  the  pulpit 


Last  Moments  of  Cranmer,  235 


from  vvhich  the  sermon  wa3  preached  by  Dr.  Cole, 
Provost  of  Eton.  In  this  his  crimes  were  set  forth, 
and  it  was  explained  to  the  audience  that,  in  his 
case,  recantation  could  not  save  his  life.  The  tears 
fell  copiously  from  the  old  man's  eyes  during  tlie  ser- 
mon. When,  however,  the  preacher  called  upon  the 
congregation  to  remain,  that  they  might  be  satisfied, 
from  his  own  mouth,  of  the  reality  of  his  repentance, 
Cranmer  collected  all  his  energies  and  prepared  to 
make  such  amends  to  God  and  man  as  might  be  still" 
possihle ;  and  even  his  enemies  will  not  deny  that  the 
closing  scene  of  his  life  was  full  of  dignity. 

Taking  off  his  cap  and  turning  to  the  people,  he 
besought  their  prayers  on  his  behalf,  that  his  sins 
might  be  forgiven,  and  specially  one  thing  which 
grieved  his  conscience  above  all  the  rest  of  which  he 
would  speak  to  them  hereafter.  He  then  knelt  down 
and,  humbling  himself  before  God,  prayed  most 
earnestly  for  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  since  he  had 
"offended  both  heaven  and  earth  more  grievously 
than  any  tongue  can  express."  After  this  he  con- 
tinued his  address  to  the  people,  exhorting  them  not 
to  set  their  hearts  on  the  things  of  this  world,  to  obey 
the  King  and  Queen  out  of  conscience  to  God,  to 
live  together  in  brotherly  love,  and  to  abound  in 
almsdeeds  according  to  their  powers. 

He  then,  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  proceeded  to 
declare  his  faith,  as  in  the  presence  of  eternity  and 
of  his  own  immortal  weal  or  woe,  when  dissimula- 
tion would  be  folly  and  worse.  Repeating  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  he  declared :  "  I  believe  every 
article  of  the  Catholic  Church  and  every  word  and 


236  Tlie  Anglican  Reformation. 

sentence  taught  by  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus 
Christ,  His  Apostles,  and  Prophets  in  the  New  and 
Old  Testaments."  There  was  a  pause,  and  then  lie 
went  on  :  "  And  no)7  I  come  to  the  great  thing  that 
so  much  troubleth  my  conscience,  more  than  any- 
thing that  ever  I  did  or  said  in  my  whole  life  ;  and 
that  is  the  setting  abroad  of  writings  contrary  to  the 
truth,  which  now  here  I  renounce  and  refuse,  as 
things  written  with  my  hand,  contrary  to  the  truth 
which  I  thought  in  my  heart,  and  written  for  fear  of 
death,  and  to  save  my  life,  if  it  might  be  ;  and  that 
is,  all  such  bills  and  papers  which  I  have  written  or 
signed  with  my  hand  since  my  degradation ;  wherein 
I  have  written  many  things  untrue.  And  for  as 
much  as  my  hand  offended,  writing  contrary  to  my 
heart,  my  hand  shall  first  be  punished  therefore ;  for 
may  I  come  to  the  fire,  it  shall  first  be  burned." 

A  great  tumult  broke  out  among  the  audience, 
some  who  had  been  cast  down  by  his  recantation 
weeping  for  joy ;  others  expressing  their  anger  and 
hatred  at  this  unexpected  manifestation  with  every 
term  of  reproach  and  contempt.  Being  reminded  of 
what  he  had  said  in  his  recantation  respecting  the 
Sacrament,  he  replied  :  "  For  this  very  fault  I  am 
most  sorry,  but  now  is  the  time  to  strip  off  all  dis- 
guise. I  say,  therefore,  that  I  believe  concerning  the 
Sacrament  as  I  taught  in  my  book  against  the  late 
Bishop  of  Winchester."  Being  asked  to  remember 
himself  and  play  the  Christian  man,  he  answered : 
"  I  do  so,  for  now  I  speak  the  truth." 

The  angry  mob  pulled  him  down  from  the  plat- 
form; but  the  soldiers  protected  him  and  led  him 


Martyrdom  of  Cranmer.  237 

forth  to  the  stake.  Cranmei's  heart  was  now  at 
peace.  He  had  sought  forgiveness  of  God,  and  set 
himself  right  with  his  fellow-men.  It  is  said  that 
he  came  out  of  the  Church  with  a  smiling  counte- 
nance. 

"  He  passed  out  smiling,  and  he  walked  upright. 
His  eye  was  like  a  soldier's  whom  the  general, 
He  looka  to  and  he  leans  on  as  his  Ood, 
Hath  rated  for  some  hackwarduess  and  bidden  him 
Charge  one  against  a  thousand,  and  the  man 
Hnrls  his  soiled  life  against  the  pikes  and  dies."  * 

As  he  passed  along,  accompanied  by  two  Spanish 
friars  who  upbraided  him  for  his  apostasy  and  sought 
to  draw  him  into  discussion,  he  could  also  hear  many 
words  of  loving  sympathy  and  mark  many  a  face 
bathed  in  tears  of  compassion.  After  some  moments 
spent  in  j)rayer  he  was  bound  by  an  iron  chain  to  the 
stake ;  and  many  pressed  around  him  to  grasp  his 
hand  for  the  last  time.  When  the  fire  was  kindled, 
he  stretched  forth  his  right  hand  over  tlie  flame  be- 
fore it  reached  his  body,  saying  aloud,  "This  hand 
hath  offended."  He  never  moved  it  from  the  flame, 
save  once  or  twice  to  wipe  his  brow,  until  it  was 
burned  awa3%  the  sufferer  exclaiming,  and  it  was  the 
only  cry  of  pain  that  came  from  him:  "That  un- 
worthy hand  1 "  His  left  hand  pointed  upwards,  his 
body  standing  motionless  and  erect,  as  though  in- 
sensible and  unconscious,  and  his  prayer  ascending 
to  heaven,  *  Lord  Jesus  receive  my  spirit." 

It  is  needless  further  to  discuss  the  virtues  and 
failings  of  one  who,  if  not  a  great  man,  yet  was  a 

'Tennyson:  "Queen  Mary."     Act  iv.    Scene  3. 


.7'< 


238  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

man  of  a  deeply  Christian  temper,  and  never  was  im- 
perious or  domineering  in  the  day  of  his  power,  or 
vindictive  to  those  who  had  done  him  wrong.  Not 
the  Anglican  Communion  alone,  but  the  whole  of 
the  English-speaking  Christian  Church  owes  him  a 
debt  of  gratitude  for  his  work  in  the  compilation  of 
the  English  Prayer  Book ;  and  hardly  less,  if  not  in- 
deed more,  for  the  exquisite  and  perfect  form  which 
lie  impressed  upon  the  English  translation  of  the 
Latin  Collects,  and  those  original  prayers  of  the  same 
kind,  constructed  on  this  model.  If  any  doubt  of 
the  greatness  of  this  debt  should  remain  on  the  mind 
of  the  reader,  it  will  be  removed  by  a  comparison 
of  the  Collects  in  the  Anglican  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  either  with  the  Collects  which  are  occasion- 
ally set  forth  by  authorit}"  for  special  purposes  in 
modern  times,  or  with  the  translations  of  the  same 
Collects  which  are  given  in  Koman  Catholic  books 
of  devotion  for  English  readers. 

Although  English  Protestantism  will  always  look 
back  with  greater  satisfaction  upon  the  martyrdom 
of  Ridley  and  Latimer  than  upon  that  of  Cranmer, 
yet  it  was  probably  this  more  than  .anything  else 
that  made  Roman  Catholicism  to  be  abhorred  in  Eng- 
land. But  the  burning  did  not  cease,  but  rather  was 
carried  on  with  greater  vigor,  men  and  women  being 
burned  in  batches,  and  no  longer  Clergy  only,  but 
many  laymen  also.  "It  was,"  says  Burnet,  "an  un- 
usual and  an  ungrateful  thing  to  the  English  nation, 
that  is  apt  to  compassionate  all  in  miser)^  to  see 
four,  five,  six,  seven,  and  once  thirteen  burning  in 
one  fire:  and  the  sparing  neither  sex  nor  age,  nor 


Protestant  Divisions.  239 

blind  nor  lame,  but  making  havoc  of  all  equally, 
raised  that  horror  in  the  whole  nation,  that  there 
seems  ever  since  that  time  such  an  abhorrence  to  that 
religion,  to  be  derived  down  from  father  to  son,  that 
it  is  no  wonder  an  aversion  so  deeply  rooted,  and 
raised  upon  such  grounds,  does,  upon  every  new  prov- 
ocation or  jealousy  of  returning  to  it,  break  out  in 
most  violent  and  convulsive  symptoms  " — a  remark 
wliich  received  various  illustrations  long  after  the 
death  of  the  writer. 

About  this  time  the  unhappy  divisions  among 
Protestants  received  a  fresh  illustration  in  the  Eng- 
lish colony  at  Frankfort.  At  first  they  used  the 
Prayer  Book  in  their  service;  but  afterwards  thought 
it  better  to  accommodate  their  manner  of  worship  to 
the  French  and  Swiss  type.  This  was  displeasing 
to  those  who  reflected  on  the  persecutions  to  which 
the  English  reformers  were  now  being  subjected  in 
England.  An  order  was  then  procured  from  the 
Senate  that  only  the  English  forms  should  be  used 
in  tlie  Church.  This  raised  opposition  on  the  part 
of  some  of  those  who  disliked  some  parts  of  the  Eng- 
lish service ;  and  John  Knox  not  only  took  part  in 
the  controversy  but  got  Calvin  also  to  write  against 
certain  things  in  the  book.  Knox  had,  about  the 
same  time,  written  rather  freely  about  the  Emperor, 
and  had  received  a  hint  from  the  Senate  of  Frank- 
fort to  depart,  so  he  and  his  friends  removed  to 
Geneva.  These  disputes  were  very  grievous  in  the 
eyes  of  the  friends  of  the  Reformation  in  England, 
to  whom  it  seemed  strange  that  men  who  had  fled 
from  persecution  and  had  sacrificed  so  much  for  con- 


240  The  Anylican  Reformation. 

science'  sake  should  quarrel  about  matters  which 
they  themselves  did  not  regard  as  touching  essen- 
tials. It  was  a  representation,  on  a  small  scale,  of 
the  troubles  attending  the  subsequent  history  of  the 
English  Reformation. 

Pole  was  consecrated  the  day  after  Cranmers 
death ;  and  at  the  beginning  of  next  year  he  under- 
took a  visitation  of  the  Universities.  When  the 
Commissioners  came  to  Cambridge,  they  put  under 
interdict  the  churches  of  St.  Mary's  and  St.  Michael's, 
because  Bucer  and  Fagius  had  been  buried  in  them. 
They  collected  all  the  heretical  books  that  could  be 
found  in  the  Colleges,  examined  into  the  services  of 
the  Chapels,  and  required  an  account  of  the  expen- 
diture of  the  funds,  which,  they  found,  could  not 
always  be  given  in  a  satisfactory  manner.  Then 
Bucer  asid  Fagius  were  cited  to  appear,  or  any  one 
in  their  place,  who  would  undertake  to  defend  them. 
After  three  citations,  no  response  being  Eiade,  they 
took  evidence  as  to  the  heresies  of  the  two  reformers, 
condemned  them  as  obstinate  heretics,  and  ordered 
their  bodies  to  be  removed  from  the  sacred  ground 
and  made  over  to  the  secular  power.  On  Febru- 
ary 6th,  their  bodies  were  taken  up  and  tied  lo  stakes, 
with  a  number  of  their  books  and  other  heretical 
publications,  and  all  burned  together. 

A  Commission  was  sent  to  Oxford  also,  where  they 
paid  visitations  of  the  same  kind  to  the  Colleges,  and 
burned  up  all  the  copies  of  the  English  Bible  they 
could  find,  and  other  objectionable  books.  Peter 
Martyr  was  on  the  Continent ;  but  his  dead  wife  lay 
buried  iu  one  of  the  churches ;  and  a  process  against 


Proceedings  Against  Htretics.  241 


her  was  beguu.  As  she  was  a  foreigner  and  could 
speak  no  English,  it  was  impossible  to  find  witnesses 
by  whose  testimony  they  mig])t  convict  her  of  heresy. 
In  this  case  they  appealed  for  counsel  to  the  Cardi- 
nal, who  decided  that,  as  she  had  been  a  nun  and 
had  broken  her  vow  by  marrying,  lier  body  should 
be  taken  up  and  buried  in  a  dungliill,  the  penalty 
adjudged  to  one  dying  excommunicated.  This  was 
carried  out.  But  in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  care  was 
taken  to  prevent  a  repetition  of  the  outrage  by  ming- 
ling her  remains  with  those  of  St.  Frideswide,  that 
both  might  share  the  same  fate.  This  work  of  the 
Commissioners  at  the  universities  seems  to  us  now 
somewhat  childish. 

The  work  of  persecution  was  now  pushed  forward 
more  vigorously.  The  magistrates  being  slack  in  the 
hunting  of  heretics,  a  commission  was  appointed 
(February  8,  1557)  "  to  search  after  all  heresies  ;  the 
bringers  in,  the  sellers,  or  readers  of  all  heretical 
books ;  to  examine  and  punish  all  misbehaviors,  or 
negligences,  in  any  Church  or  Chapel ;  and  to  try  all 
priests  who  did  not  preach  of  the  Sacrament  of  the 
Altar ;  all  persons  that  did  not  hear  Mass,  or  come 
to  their  parish  Church  to  service ;  that  would  not  go 
in  procession,  or  did  not  take  holy  bread  or  holy 
water."  All  such  persous,  when  found,  were  to  be 
put  into  the  hands  of  their  Ordinaries,  to  be  proceeded 
against  according  to  the  laws.  They  were  also  em- 
powered to  search  the  premises  of  suspected  persons, 
and  to  summon  witnesses  and  compel  them  to  give 
evidence  on  oath.     It  was  evidently  intended  now  to 

make  a  clean  sweep  of  the  whole  brood  of  heresies 
P 


242  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

and  heretics ;  and  a  large  list  of  victims  is  given  to 
show  the  fruits  of  this  new  measure ;  but  enough 
has  been  done  in  this  way  already. 

About  this  time  the  Spaniards,  aided  by  the  Eng- 
lish, were  at  war  with  the  Frencii,  by  which  the  Pope, 
Paul  IV.,  who  detested  the  Spaniards  and  feared 
them,  was  greatly  incensed  against  the  English,  es- 
pecially when  he  heard  of  the  defeat  of  the  French 
at  St.  Quentin.  Cardinal  Pole  had  never  been  a 
favorite  at  Rome.  He  was  suspected,  at  one  time, 
of  a  leaning  in  favor  of  the  Reformation ;  and  it  is 
said  that  he  went  greatly  against  his  natural  bent 
and  inclination  in  carrying  out  the  persecuting 
designs  of  the  Queen,  in  order  that  his  orthodoxy 
might  appear  to  be  beyond  question.  The  assistance 
given  by  the  English  to  the  Spanish  against  the 
Frencli  aroused  the  anger  of  the  Pontiff  against  the 
Cardinal,  and  he  determined  to  punish  him.  This 
he  did  by  making  a  decree  for  the  recalling  of  all 
the  legates  and  nuncios  in  the  King  of  Spain's 
dominions,  of  course  including  Pole.  When  the 
Pope  was  remonstrated  with  on  account  of  the 
danger  to  the  faith  in  England  at  such  a  time,  he 
said  he  would  refer  the  matter  to  the  congregation 
of  the  Inquisition;  and  promised  that  no  intimation 
should  be  made  to  Pole.  Nothincr  more  was  done 
until  September,  when  Pole  was  not  only  deprived 
of  his  legatine  authority,  but  ordered  to  come  to 
Rome  to  answer  to  the  accusation  of  favoring 
heretics. 

It  was  now  that  Mary,  in  spite  of  her  fanaticism 
and  devotion  to  Rome,  showed  that  she  had  some- 


Cardinal  Pole  and  Pope  Paul  IV.         243 

thing  of  the  spirit  of  her  father.  Pole  did  not  go  to 
Rome,  knowing  something  of  the  dangers  of  such 
an  expedition,  and  perhaps  of  the  dark  purposes  of 
the  Pontiff.  Indeed  it  is  uncertain  whether  he  re- 
ceived official  information  of  his  recall;  but  he 
ceased  to  exercise  his  legatine  authority.  Peito,  a 
Franciscan  friar,  confessor  to  the  Queen,  was  called 
over  from  England  to  Rome  by  the  Pope,  made  a 
Cardinal,  and  appointed  legate.  Bulls  were  then 
sent  to  the  Queen  embodying  the  legate's  commis- 
sions and  instructions.  But  Mary  ordered  that  every 
messenger  from  foreign  parts  should  be  detained  and 
searched,  and  following  earlier  precedents,  she  had 
the  Bulls  laid  aside  or  destroyed  without  opening 
them.  When  Peito  proceeded  on  his  journey  to  Eng- 
land, the  Queen  sent  him  word  not  to  come  over, 
giving  him  to  understand  that,  if  he  did  so,  she 
would  bring  him  and  all  who  should  acknowledge 
his  authority  under  the  penalties  of  the  Statute  of 
Praemunire.  Peito  died  in  the  following  month  of 
April  without  returning  to  England;  and  Mary  re- 
fused to  allow  Pole  to  go  to  Rome,  and  he  was  soon 
afterwards  reinstated  in  his  legatine  office. 

And  now  the  time  of  emancipation  was  drawing 
near.  Mary  was  only  about  forty-three  years  of  age, 
and  she  had  reigned  little  more  than  five  years ;  but 
they  were  terrible  years  to  her  subjects,  and  hardly 
less  so  to  herself.  She  had  failed  in  everything. 
Mary  never  had  the  English  nature  and  the  English 
sympathies  of  her  father  and  her  sister ;  yet  in  her 
own  narrow  Spanish  nature  she  liad  a  very  strong 
conscientiousness,  a  feeling  of  duty  to  her  people. 


24-i  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

But  she  had  so  far  failed  to  win  their  confidence  and 
afifection  tliat  they  feared  her  and  liated  her.  She 
adored  her  worthless  husband,  and  would  have  done 
anything  to  secure  his  affections;  but  the  failure  to 
have  an  heir  had  snapped  the  slender  tie  that  bound 
them  together;  and  he  had  departed  for  the  second 
time  and  never  again  to  return.  She  had  done  wliat 
she  thought  her  best  to  put  down  heresy  and  to  pre- 
vent the  spread  of  the  spiritual  mtdady  by  which 
the  Church  had  been  afflicted,  and  the  only  result 
was  a  deeper  alienation  from  the  holy  see  and  the 
religion  of  Rome.  In  the  last  year  but  one  of  her 
life  she  had  actually  quarreled  with  the  Pope  and 
set  his  commands  at  defiance.  The  last  blow  was 
given  by  the  loss  of  Calais.  The  name  of  it,  she 
said,  would  be  found  written  upon  her  heart,  whea 
she  was  dead. 

The  French  Ambassador,  Noailles,  gives  a  sad 
picture  of  her  last  dtiys  :  "  She  lived  almost  alone, 
employing  all  her  time  in  tears,  lamentations,  and 
regrets,  in  writing  to  try  to  draw  back  her  husband 
to  hrv,  and  in  fury  against  her  subjects.'*  And  her 
sentiments  toward  those  whom  she  ruled  were  re- 
flected in  their  estimate  of  their  Queen.  **  Among 
all  her  subjects  there  arose  a  great  clamor  because 
that  she  made  so  many  persons  to  perish,  the  uni- 
versal opinion  being  tha^  these  poor  wretches,  who 
are  hurried  away  to  divers  punishments,  are  all  of 
them  innocent."  She  died  November  17,  1558  in 
her  forty-third  year ;  and  within  a  few  hours  she  was 
followed  by  Cardinal  Pole. 
.    Of  this  Cardinal  hardly  any  evil  can  be  said  ex- 


Death  of  Mary.  245 


cept  that  his  lot  fell  on  evil  times,  and  it  was  impos- 
sible for  him  to  give  full  expression  to  liis  gentle- 
ness, kind-heartedness,  and  other  "  excellent  virtues." 
But  little  of  the  guilt  of  persecution  can  he  laid  at 
his  door.  As  for  the  Queen,  if  we  cannot  agree 
with  Roman  Catholic  historians  in  placing  her  among 
the  best  of  queens,  we  must  yet  acknowledge  the 
innocence,  the  purity,  and  the  religious  character  of 
her  life.  She  was  a  good  scholar  and  a  devout  Cath- 
olic. Even  her  resentment  at  the  bad  treatment  she 
liad  received  in  early  days  did  not  equal  her  zeal  for 
the  faith  which  she  professed.  Bitter  as  she  was 
against  heretics,  she  does  not  seem  to  have  been 
other  than  kind  and  gentle  to  her  friends ;  and  if  in 
her  latter  days  she  was  somewhat  soured  and  embit- 
tered, we  may  more  easily  understand  this  than 
blame  it. 

Before  we  turn  the  last  page  of  this  reign,  some- 
thing should  be  said  of  the  life  of  one  who  is  now 
about  to  assume  the  first  place  in  shaping  the  des- 
tinies of  the  English  people  and  the  English  Church, 
the  Princess  Elizabeth.  Her  life  had  been  one  of 
great  difficulty  during  her  sister's  reign.  From  the 
beginning  she  was  suspected  as  a  heretic  and  as  an 
intriguer  for  the  throne.  When  she  was  brought 
into  the  Tower,  several  of  Mary's  adherents  recom- 
mended that  she  should  be  put  to  death.  She  es- 
caped  this  danger,  but  was  closely  watched  while  in 
the  keeping  of  Sir  Henry  Bedingfield,  a  devoted  Ro- 
man Catholic.  She  conformed  to  the  religion  then 
established,  and  probably  without  doing  violence  to 
her  convictions. 


246  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


At  one  time  she  was  so  much  alarmed  as  to  her 
safety  that  she  thought  of  taking  refuge  in  Fiance ; 
but  the  French  ambassador  strongly  advised  her  not 
to  leave  the  country,  as  she  might  thereby  forfeit  her 
succession  to  the  throne.  Several  attempts  were 
made  to  induce  her  to  marry ;  but  her  difficulties  in 
this  respect  were  great.  She  could  not  marry  a  Ro- 
man Catholic  without  proclaiming  herself  on  that 
side  ;  and  she  could  not  marry  a  Protestant  without 
placing  herself  in  opposition  to  the  Queen,  her  sister. 
Her  position  was  an  exceedingly  difficult  one.  Eliz- 
abeth was  hardly  a  Protestant  in  the  ordinary  sense 
of  the  word ;  but  the  daughter  of  Anne  Boleyn 
could  not  well  submit  herself  to  a  religion  which  de- 
nied that  her  mother  was  married,  and  declared  that 
she  was  illegitimate.  Yet  it  were  a  precarious  posi- 
tion to  occupy,  if  she  ventured  to  declare  against 
the  claims  of  Rome. 

When,  therefore,  proposals  of  marriage  came  to 
her  from  the  Son  of  the  King  of  Denmark,  and  from 
the  King  of  Sweden,  she  refused  to  receive  the  en- 
voy of  the  latter,  referring  him  to  the  Queen,  whom 
she  assured  that  she  had  never  heard  the  King's 
name  before,  and  never  wished  to  hear  it  again. 
She  said,  she  had  refused  several  offers  in  the  reign 
of  King  Edward,  and  she  wished  still  to  remain  a 
single  woman. 

On  the  other  side,  Philibert,  Duke  of  Savoy,  was 
strongly  recommended,  as  a  suitor,  by  Philip,  who 
hoped,  in  that  way,  still  to  secure  the  alliance  of 
England.  Mary  consented  to  this  proposal  with 
great  reluctance ;  and  then  withdrew  her  consent, 


The  Princess  Elizabeth,  247 

on  the  ground  that  marriage  ought  to  be  free,  and 
that  she  could  not  conscientiously  constrain  her  sis- 
ter to  marry  o  man  whom  she  disliked. 

In  this  manner  tlie  Princess  passed  her  days  dur- 
ing those  five  anxious  years,  professedly  left  at  lib- 
erty, but  in  reality  under  surveillance  wherever  she 
went.  Iler  allowance  was  said  to  be  insufficient  to 
maintain  the  dignity  of  the  Queen's  sister  and  heir. 
But  Mary  was  lierself  forced  to  be  careful  and  even 
parsimonious,  being  desirous  of  reducing  the  great 
debt  of  the  crown.  There  was  no  love  lost  between 
them.  Either  the  one  or  the  other  was  illegitimate, 
even  if  the  law  which  proclaimed  them  both  to  be 
such  could  not  be  sustained.  Mary  even  tliought  of 
having  Elizabeth  declared,  by  Parliament,  incapable 
of  succeeding  to  the  throne,  thus  annulling  the  ar- 
rangement of  Henry  VIII.  But  Philip  saw  that  this 
would  leave  the  place  open  to  Mary  Queen  of  Scots, 
and  so  to  a  French  alliance,  as  the  Scottish  Queen 
was  betrothed  to  the  Dauphin,  wliom  she  married  in 
the  year  of  Mary's  death.  It  was,  therefore,  ar- 
ranged that  Elizabeth  should  succeed  in  case  of 
Mary's  death  before  her,  and  from  that  time  Mary 
treated  her  with  greater  kindness  and  consideration. 


CHAPTER  XVII. 

THE  ELIZABETHAN  REFORM. 

HORTLY  after  the  death  of  Mary,  Heath, 
Archbishop  of  York,  who  had  succeeded 
Gardiner  as  Lord  Chancellor,  announced 
the  event  to  the  House  of  Lords ;  and,  send- 
ing for  the  House  of  Commons,  he  told  them  that 
God  had  taken  to  His  mercy  their  late  Sovereign, 
the  Lady  Mary;  -which,  he  said,  would  have  been 
even  a  greater  loss  to  them,  if  they  had  not  such  a 
successor  in  the  person  of  her  royal  sister,  the  Lady 
Elizabeth,  of  whose  right  and  title  none  could  make 
any  question.  It  had  been  established  by  the  statute 
of  the  thirty-fifth  of  Henry  VHI. ;  and  the  two 
Houses  had  now  only  to  discharge  their  duty  by  con- 
curring in  the  proclamation  of  the  new  Queen.  The 
announcement  evoked  loud  and  repeated  cries  of 
"God  save  Queen  Elizabeth  I  long  may  she  reign." 
She  was  immediately  proclaimed,  first  in  West- 
minster Hall,  and  then  at  Temple  Bar. 

Elizabeth  was  at  Hatfielu  when  a  deputation  ar- 
rived from  the  Council  to  acquaint  her  with  her  ac- 
cession to  the  throne.  Her  conduct  showed  her  ap- 
preciation of  the  dirficulty  of  her  position,  but  also 
the  calm  and  resolute  manner  in  which  she  had  pre- 
pared to  take  the  reins  of  government  in  her  hands. 
She  declared  that  she  accepted  the  burden  impoFed 

248 


Elizaheth  and  Her  Ministers.  249 

upon  her  by  the  will  of  God,  and  that  she  would 
call  to  her  aid  the  counsels  of  wise  and  faithful  ad- 
visers. First  among  those  was  Sir  William  Cecil, 
afterwards  Lord  Burleigh.  Cecil  was  a  man  after 
Elizabeth's  own  heart.  His  relations  to  the  previous 
reign  had  been  similar  to  her  own.  He  had  con- 
formed, but  not  with  the  best  grace;  and  Elizabeth 
felt  and  knew  that  in  him  she  should  find  a  coun- 
sellor whom  she  could  trust. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  greatness  of  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth  was  the  effect  of  the  ability  of  the  men 
whom  she  gathered  around  her ;  and  there  is  a  sense 
in  which  the  statement  may  be  accepted.  But  those 
who  would,  in  this  way  alone,  explain  the  greatness 
of  the  period,  overlook  the  wisdom  wliich  made 
choice  of  such  counsellors;  and,  that  wliich  is,  if 
possible,  a  more  serious  oversight,  that  Elizabeth  not 
only  reigned,  but  ruled.  She  had  her  own  views, 
her  own  plans,  and  although  she  sometimes  relin- 
quished them  in  favor  of  those  recommended  to  her, 
she  never  abdicated  lier  position  of  final  appeal. 
Whilst  Elizabeth,  for  a  time,  carefully  concealed  her 
intentions  respecting  the  Church,  she  made  it  evi- 
dent at  once  that  she  bore  no  malice  towards  those 
who,  in  obeying  her  sister,  might  have  been  un- 
friendly to  herself.  To  Bonner  alone,  it  would  ap- 
pear, she  showed  marked  coldness,  holding  him  re- 
sponsible for  much  of  the  blood  shed  during  the  re- 
cent persecutions.  Slie  retained  several  of  her  sis- 
ter's counsellors,  all  of  whom  professed  to  be  Roman 
Catholics;  but  all  tlie  new  members  of  the  Council 
whom  she  appointed  were  of  the  reformed  faith. 


250  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Her  real  confidence,  however,  was  given  to  Cecil  and 
Lis  friencs. 

Soon  after  her  coming  to  the  throne,  intelligence 
was  sent  to  foreign  courts  of  the  death  of  Mary  and 
the  succession  of  Elizabeth.  In  the  letters  sent,  her 
hereditary  right  was  declared,  but  the  assent  of  Par- 
liament was  also  announced.  In  the  letters  to  Philip 
and  the  Emperor  an  assurance  was  given  of  the 
Queen's  intention  to  maintain  the  alliance  between 
the  House  of  Austria  and  the  English  crown.  To 
the  Lutheran  rulers,  it  is  said,  an  assurance  of  sym- 
pathy was  sent,  and  a  desire  was  expressed  for  the 
formation  of  a  union  among  all  the  friends  of  the 
Reformation.  As  regards  the  Pope,  it  has  been 
stated  that  Paul  IV.  declared  that  she  had  no  right 
to  the  throne  ;  yet,  if  she  would  submit,  he  would  do 
for  her  all  that  was  possible.  Lingard  declares  that 
this  story  is  a  fiction,  invented  to  throw  upon  the 
Pope  the  blame  of  the  subsequent  rupture  between 
England  and  Rome.  There  can,  however,  be  no 
doubt  on  another  point.  Philip  had  not  given  up 
the  hope  of  uniting  Spain  and  England,  and  pre- 
suming, perhaps,  on  some  expressions  of  gratitude 
on  the  part  of  Elizabeth,  on  account  of  kindnesses 
shown  to  her  during  her  sister's  life,  the  King  of 
Spain  proposed  marriage  to  her,  assuring  her  that  he 
should  be  able  to  procure  a  dispensation  from  Rome. 
The  proposed  marriage  was  as  distasteful  to  the 
Queen  as  it  would  have  been  to  her  people. 

The  people  were  still  in  suspense  in  regard  to  the 
Queen's  designs  as  to  religion.  She  continued  to 
assist  at  mass  as  she  had  done  during  tlie  late  reign, 


Religious  Attitude  of  Elizabeth.  251 

and  she  permitted  the  use  of  the  Roman  ritual  at 
Mary's  funeral.  At  the  same  time,  however,  those 
imprisoned  under  the  late  government  were  restored 
to  liherty ;  and  the  emigrants  to  the  Continent  were 
allowed  to  return ;  whilst  Oglethorpe,  Bishop  of 
Carlisle,  was  forbidden  to  elevate  the  Host  in  the 
Queen's  chapel.  Notwithstanding,  she  allowed  the 
Coronation  to  take  ^  lace,  with  the  old  ritual,  and  re- 
ceived the  Communion  in  one  kind  (January  12, 
1559). 

But  now  the  work  of  reformation  was  to  be  taken 
in  hand  in  earnest.  Elizabeth  had  declared,  at  her 
accession,  that  she  would  do  as  her  father  had  done. 
It  was  clear,  therefore,  that  the  papal  supremacy  was 
to  be  disowned.  How  much  further  she  might  be 
inclined  to  go  was  not  so  certain.  A  woman  who 
retained  the  crucifix  in  her  private  chapel  could 
hardly  be  prepared  to  go  all  lengths  with  the  re- 
formers in  her  brother's  reign ;  and  the  quarrels  of 
the  ultra-Protestants  on  the  Continent,  together  with 
their  attitude  and  demands  on  their  return  to  Eng- 
land, were  little  likely  to  incline  her  to  favor  them. 
On  the  other  hand,  to  retain  the  Latin  services 
would  be  equivalent  to  condemning  the  Reforma- 
tion, and  keeping  before  men's  eyes  a  kind  of  argu- 
ment for  Roman  unity. 

A  paper  was  drawn  out,  probably  by  Cecil,  sketch- 
iug  the  policy  of  the  Elizabethan  Reformers.  An 
account  of  it  is  given  by  Camden,  and  the  copy  still 
in  existence  agrees  with  his  description.  This  paper 
is  of  the  greater  importance  that  it  forecasts  the  sub- 
sequent action   of  Elizabeth  and  her  government. 


1 


252  The  Anglican  lleformalion. 

After  pointing  out  the  dangers  to  which  the  Queen 
would  be  exposed  from  the  Pope,  foreign  princes, 
and  those  who  had  been  in  authority  under  Queen 
Mary,  the  document  went  on  to  recommend  peace 
with  France  and  the  cherishing  of  those  who  favored 
the  Reformation.  As  for  those  who  had  borne  rule 
in  Mary's  time,  they  must  not  be  too  soon  trusted 
or  eniployed,  even  if  they  professed  to  turn ;  but 
those  who  were  known  to  be  well  affected  to  the 
Queen  were  to  be  sought  out  and  encouraged.  As 
the  bishops  were  generally  hated  by  the  nation,  it 
would  be  easy  to  bring  tliem  within  the  operation  of 
the  Statute  of  Praemunire ;  and  they  should  not  be 
released  from  its  penalties  until  they  had  renounced 
the  Popo  and  consented  to  the  reforms.  Some 
learned  men  should  be  appointed  to  revise  the  Serv- 
ice books  of  the  Church,  but  in  the  meantime,  they 
should  not  be  allowed  to  innovate  without  authority. 
A  commission  consisting  of  Parker,  Grindal,  Cox, 
and  others,  was  appointed  to  prepare  a  revision  of 
the  English  Prayer  Book  as  it  had  been  left  at  the 
death  of  King  Edward.  In  the  meantime  it  was 
allowed  to  give  the  Communion  in  both  kinds. 

A  proclamation  was  issued  December  27,  1558, 
giving  effect  to  these  resolutions.  In  this  the  Queen 
** charges  and  commands  all  manner  of  her  subjects'* 
to  use  no  other  manner  of  service,  but  that  which  is 
already  used  in  her  Majesty's  own  Chapel,  and  the 
Lord's  Prayer  and  the  Creed  in  English,  until  consul- 
tation should  be  made  by  her  Majesty  and  the  three 
estates  of  the  realm.  This  Parliament  was  appointed 
to  meet  on  the  28d  of  January,  1559,  the  writs  be- 


First  Parliament  of  Elizabeth.  253 

iijg  sent  out  by  Sir  Nicholas  Bacon,  who  had  suc- 
ceeded 1  loath  as  Lord  Chancellor.  At  the  opening 
of  the  Parliament  he  spoke  in  the  same  sense  which 
we  have  found  expressed  in  the  designs  of  the  Coun- 
cil. Nothing,  he  said,  was  to  be  done,  which  would 
in  any  way  "breed  or  nourish  any  kind  of  idolatry  or 
superstition ; "  yet,  on  the  other  hand,  care  should 
be  taken  that  "  by  no  licentious  or  loose  handling, 
any  manner  of  occasion  be  given  to  any  contempt  or 
irreverent  behavior  toward  God  and  godly  things, 
that  no  spice  of  irreligion  might  creep  in  or  be  con- 
ceived." It  is  certainly  not  too  much  to  say  that  in 
tliese  utterances  we  have  the  Keynote  of  the  Angli- 
can Reformation. 

Parliament  met  on  the  appointed  day,  the  23d, 
but  was  prorogued  until  the  25th  of  January.  It  is 
hardly  necessary  to  say  that  no  reference  had  been 
made  to  Convocation ;  but  tins  cannot  be  imputed 
as  a  fault  to  the  Government,  since  tlie  reforming 
Clergy  had  been  practically  extinguished,  all  of  them 
having  been  deprived,  and  many  of  them  put  to 
death. 

Before  any  important  business  was  transacted,  a 
deputation  from  the  House  of  Commons  was  sent  to 
the  Queen,  humbly  praying  her  to  enter  into  matri- 
mony, so  as  to  supply  "  heirs  to  her  Majesty's  royal 
virtues  and  dominions."  This  was  a  very  difficult 
matter  to  debate.  We  have  already  referred  to  the 
obstacles  in  the  way  of  Elizabeth's  marriage ;  and 
she  gave  the  Commons  to  understand  that,  deeply  as 
she  appreciated  their  affectionate  interest,  and  reso- 
lute as  she  was  to  contract  no  marriage  that  should 


25-4  The  Anylican  Reformalion. 

not  be  for  tho  welfare  of  her  people,  she  must  be 
allowed  to  consult  her  own  discretion  in  this  matter. 
She  had  been  quite  satisfied,  so  far,  she  said,  with 
her  single  state.  Honorable  proposals  had  been 
made  to  her  in  her  brother's  reign,  which  she  had  not 
entertained.  She  could  not  tell  what  might  happen 
in  the  future ;  but  if  she  married,  she  would  make 
such  a  choice  as  should  be  to  the  satisfaction  and 
welfare  of  her  people.  If  she  did  not,  her  people 
were  to  her  as  children,  and  God  would  provide  a 
successor.  For  her  part,  she  would  be  contented  to 
have  it  inscribed  upon  her  tomb:  "Here  lies  a 
Queen  who  reigned  so  long,  and  died  a  virgin."  If 
she  could  not  comply  at  once  with  their  request,  she 
did  at  least  give  them  thanks  for  their  kindly  thought. 

Among  the  first  acts  of  the  new  Parliament  was 
the  recognition  of  Elizabeth's  title  to  the  crown ;  but 
the  principal  business  with  which  they  were  occupied 
was  the  settlement  of  religion.  On  the  15th  of  Feb- 
ruary a  Bill  was  brought  in  for  restoring  the  English 
Service ;  on  the  21st  for  throwing  off  the  supremacy 
of  the  Pope  and  transferring  it  to  the  crown. 

On  the  17th  of  March  a  Bill  was  brought  in  reviv- 
ing the  laws  on  religion  of  King  Edward  VI. ;  and  on 
the  21st  another,  restoring  to  the  Queen  the  nomina- 
tion to  bishoprics ;  but  the  method  by  letters  patent 
was  abandoned  and  the  Conge  cC  Hire  was  restored. 
All  bishops  and  other  ecclesiastical  persons  and  all 
in  any  civil  employment  were  required  to  swear  that 
they  acknowledged  the  Queen  to  be  Supreme  Gov- 
ernor in  all  causes,  ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil, 
within  her  dominions.    At  the  same  time,  by  the 


71ie  Elizahtthan  Reform.  255 

Queen's  own  desire,  the  title  of  Supreme  Head  of 
the  Churcli  was  abandoned,  and  that  of  Supreme 
Governor  substituted.  By  way  of  giving  eft'ect  to 
these  ordinances  it  was  enacted  tliat  wwy  one  refus- 
ing this  oath,  should  forfeit  any  office  he  held  in 
Church  or  State;  and  further  that,  if  any  should  ad- 
vocate the  authority  of  any  foreign  power,  they 
should  forfeit  all  their  goods  and  chattels ;  for  their 
second  offence  should  incur  the  penalties  of  Prseni- 
unire,  and  for  a  third,  be  held  guilty  of  treason.  In 
regard  to  heresy,  nothing  should  be  so  judged  but 
what  was  so  declared  in  the  Canonical  Scriptures  or 
by  the  first  four  general  Councils. 

Meanwhile  Convocation  was  not  idle.  With  great 
unanimity  both  Houses  passed  resolutions  which  were 
presented  to  the  House  of  Lords,  declaring  their  be- 
lief in  Transubstantiation,  the  corporal  presence,  the 
sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  the  supremacy  and  authority 
of  the  Pope,  and  the  right  of  the  Spirituality  alone 
to  determine  the  faith  and  regulate  the  worship  of 
the  Church.  The  bishops  seized  every  opportunity 
of  speaking  and  voting  in  favor  of  these  propositions; 
and  the  Universities  accepted  the  greater  part  of 
them.  In  order  to  do  away  with  the  impression  that 
these  resolutions  represented  the  sense  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church,  it  was  resolved  to  hold  a  conference  for 
the  discussion  of  these  subjects,  in  Westminster  Ab- 
bey; five  bishops  and  three  doctors  appearing  on 
the  Roman  side,  and  eight  divines  on  the  Anglican. 
Bacon,  the  Lord  Keeper,  was  appointed  president, 
and  the  debates  in  Parliament  were  suspended,  that 
the  members  might  be  present  at  the  discussion. 


253  The  Anrjlican  lieformaiion. 

It  was  agreed  tliat  tlio  discussion  should  bo  con- 
ducted in  writing,  the  Bishops  coramenciiig  aiid  the 
reformers  replying.  The  subjects  to  bo  debated 
were:  1.  As  to  the  proper  langungo  to  bo  used  in 
public  service.  2.  As  to  the  power  of  particular 
Ciiurches  to  change  ecclesiastical  rites  and  ceremon- 
ies. 3.  Whether  it  can  be  proved  from  Scripture  that 
there  is  a  propitiatory  Sacrifice  for  the  living  and  dead 
in  the  Eucharist.  The  Roman  advocates,  seeing  the 
disadvantage  at  which  they  were  placed  as  giving 
the  last  word  to  their  opponents,  declared  that  they 
preferred  an  oral  discussion  to  the  reading  of  papers. 
Tiie  Lord  Keeper  reminded  them  that  Archbishop 
Heath  had  accepted  the  terms  prescribed.  Upon  this 
Dr.  Cole  partly  read  and  partly  spoke  an  argument 
against  service  in  the  common  tongue ;  and  Dr. 
Home  replied.  The  Roman  advocates  asked  leave 
to  answer  Home;  but  they  were  reminded  that  this 
was  contrary  to  the  agreement,  and  the  other  mem- 
bers of  their  party  had  been  offered  the  privilege  of 
speaking  after  Cole.  They  were  told,  however,  that, 
if  they  would  put  their  answer  in  writing  it  should 
be  heard  at  another  sitting.  On  this  occasion  the 
Lord  Keeper  insisted  on  the  second  point  being  gone 
into,  when  a  protest  was  entered  by  the  Romans. 
They  agreed,  however,  to  proceed  to  the  second 
I)oint  on  condition  of  being  respondents.  They 
weie  told  that  this  was  contrary  to  the  agreement, 
when  they  declined  to  proceed.  They  could  hardly 
be  blamed  for  resisting  such  a  one-sided  arrangement. 
Bacon,  however,  refused  to  alter  the  form  of  pro- 
ceeding and  broke  up  the  conference.     The  Bishops 


Parker  and  Quest,  257 

of  Winchester  and  Lincoln  were  sent  to  the  Tower 
for  their  disobedience.  Burnet  8ii3'8  tlmt  the  Bish- 
ops had  siiid  something  of  exconmuinicuting  the 
Queen  and  her  Council,  and  tliat  upon  this  they 
were  both  sent  to  the  Tower. 

The  revision  of  the  Prayer  Book  was  now  being 
proceeded  with.  Matthew  Parker,  afterwards  Arch- 
bisliop  of  Canterbury,  was  a  leading  man  in  the 
commission ;  but  being  unable,  through  illness,  to 
attend  to  the  work,  his  place  was  taken  by  Guest, 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Rochester.  It  was  originally 
intended,  and  it  was  the  Queen's  desire,  that  the  first 
Prayer  Book  should  bo  adopted  as  the  basis,  and  that 
as  few  alterations,  in  a  Puritan  direction,  as  were 
possible  should  be  admitted.  But  it  was  thought 
better  to  conciliate  the  exiles  who  had  come  under 
Protestant  influences  on  the  Continent.  The 
Queen's  wishes  were  conveyed  by  Cecil  to  Guest ; 
and  it  was  suggested  that  the  Crucifix  should  be  re- 
tained, processions  sanctioned,  the  cope  ordered  to 
be  used  in  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist,  the  pres- 
eiice  of  non  communicants  allowed,  prayers  for  the 
dead  permitted,  and  kneeling  at  reception  required. 
Guest  replied  that  it  would  not  be  well  to  restore 
ceremonies  already  removed  ;  and  that,  since  images 
are  condemned  in  Scripture,  the  Crucifix  is  con- 
demned ;  that  processions  are  unnecessary ;  that, 
since  the  surplice  is  sufficient  in  baptizing  and  other 
services,  it  might  well  be  used  at  the  Communion. 
Prayer  for  the  dead,  it  was  said,  was  not  a  primitive 
custom,  and  was  of  dangerous  tendency  ;  and  it  was 
Q 


258  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

the  Ancient  practice  to  dismiss  non-communicants 
before  the  beginning  of  the  Liturgy  proper:  kneel- 
ing and  standing  might  be  left  indifferent. 

The  Prayer  Book,  thus  prepared,  was  brought  be- 
fore Parliament,  and  is  described  in  the  Act  of  Uni- 
formity as  the  "book  authorized  by  Parliament  in 
the  fifth  and  sixth  years  of  Edward  VI.  with  one 
alteration  or  addition  of  certain  lessons  to  be  used 
on  every  Sunday  in  the  year,  and  the  form  of  the 
Litany  altered  and  corrected,  and  two  sentences  only 
added  in  the  delivery  of  the  Sacrament  to  the  com- 
municants, and  none  other  or  otherwise."  Such  was 
the  book  presented  to  Parliament;  but  it  is  evident 
that  alterations  were  afterwards  made  in  it  by  the 
Queen  in  Council.  Not  only  do  we  find,  in  the 
Elizabethan  Prayer  Book,  the  changes  mentioned,  as 
to  the  lessons,  the  omission  of  the  allusion  to  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  in  the  Litany,  and  the  joining  to- 
gether of  the  two  sentences  used  successively  at  the 
administration  of  Holy  Communion,  in  the  first  and 
second  books  of  Edward  VL ;  but  besides  these 
changes,  it  was  ordered  that  the  Morning  and  Even- 
ing Prayer  was  to  be  "used  in  the  accustomed  place 
of  the  Church,  Chapel,  or  Chancel,"  and  not,  as  before, 
"  in  such  place  as  the  people  may  best  hear."  In  the 
second  rubric  it  had  been  ordered  that  the  minister, 
"  being  an  Archbishop  or  a  bishop,  shall  have  and 
wear  a  rochet ;  and  being  a  priest  or  deacon,  he  shall 
have  and  wear  a  surplice  only ; "  whilst  in  the  Eliza- 
bethan rubric  it  is  ordered  that  "  the  minister  at  the 
time  of  the  Communion,  and  at  all  other  times  in 
his  ministration,  shall  use  such  ornaments  in  the 


The  Prayer  Book.  269 

Church  as  were  in  use  by  authority  of  Parliament  in 
the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Edward  VI., 
according  to  the  Act  of  Parliament  set  in  the  begin- 
ning of  this  book."  It  shonid  be  noted  here  that 
the  words,  in  the  Act  of  Uniformity  thus  referred  to, 
run  somewhat  differently,  as  follows :  "  that  such 
ornaments  of  the  Church  and  of  the  ministers 
thereof,  shall  be  retained  and  be  in  use  as  was  in  this 
Church  of  England,  by  authority  of  Parliament,  in 
the  second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Edward  VI., 
until  other  order  shall  be  therein  taken  by  the 
authority  of  the  Queen's  Majesty,  with  the  advice  of 
her  Commissioners  appointed  and  authorized,  under 
the  Great  Seal  of  England,  for  causes  ecclesiastical, 
or  of  the  Metropolitan  of  this  realm."  In  the 
Litany,  not  only  the  phrase  respecting  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  is  omitted,  but  the  suflrage  for  the  Queen 
had  these  words  added:  "Strengthen  in  the  true 
worshipping  of  Thee,  in  righteousness  and  holiness 
of  life."  The  Prayers  for  the  Queen  and  the  Clergy 
were  placed  before  the  "  Prayer  of  Chrysostom  "  in 
the  Litany,  the  occasional  prayers  being  removed 
from  that  position  and  placed  after  the  Grace  which 
is  now  introduced  after  the  Prayer  of  St.  Chrysostom. 
But  perhaps  the  most  important  change  was  the 
omission  of  the  "black  rubric"  at  the  end  of  the 
Communion  Service,  in  which  an  explanation  was 
given  of  the  significance  of  kneeling  at  the  reception 
of  the  Sacrament.  The  reason  of  such  omission  is 
plain  enough.  It  was  not  intended  as  a  condemna- 
tion of  the  doctrine  contained  in  the  rubric,  for  the 
Queen  forbade  the  elevation  of  the  host ;  but  it  was 


260  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

the  wish  of  Elizabeth  and  her  counsellors  to  make 
the  Church  and  its  Services  as  comprehensive  as  pos- 
sible, so  that  no  one  should  have  an  excuse  for  re- 
jecting the  teaching  or  abstaining  from  the  Trorship 
of  t;he  national  Church. 

The  changes  in  tlie  Ordinal  were  sliglit.  The 
oath  is  styled  "  of  the  Queen's  Sovereignty,"  instead 
of  "The  oath  of  the  King's  Supremacy,"  and  instead 
of  being  directed  against  "  the  usurped  power  and 
authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,"  it  is  "  against  the 
power  and  authority  of  all  foreign  potentates." 

The  passing  of  the  Elizabethan  Act  of  Uniform- 
ity was  strenuously  resisted  by  the  bishops  in  the 
House  of  Lords  on  the  ground  that  it  was  disapproved 
by  the  whole  body  of  the  Clergy.  It  did  not  matter 
to  them  that  it  was  substantially  a  book  which  htid 
been  in  general  use  only  five  years  before.  All  the 
bishops  and  nine  temporal  peers  voted  against 
it,  and  it  was  carried  by  a  majority  of  only  three 
(April  28). 

By  the  Act  of  Uniformity  it  wjis  laid  down  that 
all  who  should  absent  themselves  from  church  with- 
out cause  should  pay  a  fine  of  one  shilling,  which 
should  be  given  to  the  poor.  It  gave  the  Queen 
power,  in  case  of  need,  to  "ordain  and  publish  such 
further  ceremonies  and  rites  as  may  be  most  for  the 
advancement  of  God's  glory,  the  edifying  of  His 
church,  and  the  due  reverence  of  Christ's  holy  mys- 
teries and  Sacraments."  If  tliese  words  were  in- 
tended to  ^ive  an  opportunity  for  the  heightening  of 
tlio  Ritual  of  the  Ciuircli,  as  the  Queen  had  it  in 
her  own  chapel,  and  as  she  nrobably  desired  that  it 


Church  Property.  261 


should  be  in  the  Church  at  large,  the  state  c.  mi's 
minds  did  not  idlovv  of  any  action  being  tuKen. 
Partly  the  remembrance  of  the  days  of  Mary  and 
partly  the  notions  brought  back  from  the  Continent 
made  the  people  averse  to  Roman  customs.  All  the 
facts  known  to  us  would  lead  to  the  belief  that  no 
ecclesiastical  vestments  were  worn  during  this  reign 
but  the  surplice  and  the  cope.  The  new  Prayer 
Book  was  ordered  to  be  used  on  and  after  the  Feast  of 
St.  John  Baptist  (June  24, 1559)  ;  but  in  many  places 
it  was  used  in  the  month  of  May. 

In  reversing  the  policy  of  Mary,  it  was  natural 
that  the  measures  she  had  passed  for  the  restitution 
of  Church  property  should  be  reconsidered,  and 
several  acts  were  passed  annulling  those  of  the  pre- 
vious reign.  Some  of  these  were  readily  assented 
to,  others  vigorously  resisted.  It  was  with  difficulty 
that  an  act  was  passed,  allowing  the  Queen,  in  case 
of  the  vacancy  of  a  bishopric,  to  reserve  to  herself 
any  lands  belonging  to  the  see,  giving  impropriate 
tithes  in  exchange.  This  was  ojiposed  in  the  House 
of  Commons,  because  the  evil  efcects  of  such  an  ar- 
rangement had  been  seen  in  the  timeof  Edward  VI., 
when  under  pretence  of  conveying  endowments  to 
the  Crown,,  the  courtiers  had  the  lands  divided 
among  themselves.  Another  act  restored  to  the 
Crown  the  first-fruits  of  benefices ;  and  by  another 
the  religious  foundations  of  Mary  were  suppressed 
and  the  proceeds  vested  in  the  Crown. 

It  was  now  time  to  apply  the  new  laws  to  tlie 
rulers  of  the  Church.  They  had  been  allowed  con- 
siderable liberty ;    and  probably  the  Queen  deter- 


262  The  Amjlican  Reformation, 


mined  to  give  a  good  deal  of  latitude  to  all  who 
would  obey  the  laws  of  the  laud.  But  now  that  the 
Act  of  Suprouuicy  was  passed,  along  with  the  Act 
of  Uniformity,  it  was  necessary  to  ascertain  whether 
the  bishops  would  conform  and  take  the  oath  of  su- 
premacy. Already,  as  we  have  seen,  two  of  them 
had  found  their  way  to  the  Tower.  All  of  them, 
except  Oglethorpe,  had  declined  to  take  part  in  the 
Coronation,  although  the  Latin  service  had  been 
used.  And  now,  of  the  bishops  remaining  all  save 
one,  Kitchin  of  LlandafT,  refused  to  take  the  oath  of 
supremacy  and  accordingly  were  deprived  and  placed 
under  restraint.  Their  treatment  was  widely  differ- 
ent from  that  which  had  been  accorded  to  the  re- 
forming bishops  under  Mary.  Heath,  Turberville, 
and  Poole  were  allowed  to  remain  on  their  own  es- 
tates. Tunstall,  Thirlby,  and  Bonner  resided  with 
considerable  freedom  in  the  houses  of  some  of  tiie 
reformers.  Bonner  was  sent  to  the  Marshalsea, 
partly,  it  is  said,  to  protect  him  from  the  rage  of  the 
people.  He  died  there  ten  years  afterwards,  Septem- 
ber 6,  1569.  Of  the  other  Clergy  the  greater  number 
conformed.  Fewer  than  two  hundred  were  deprived 
in  the  whole  of  England. 

The  reformation  of  the  Church  throughout  the 
Kingdom  was  now  undertaken  in  earnest.  Com- 
missioners were  sent  to  exainine  into  tlie  state  of  the 
parishes  and  see  to  the  deprival  of  disloyal  clergy- 
men.  Along  with  them  preacliers  went  to  instruct 
and  enlighten  the  people  ;  and  it  is  said  they  found 
many  of  them  sunk  in  the  most  degrading  supersti- 
tions.   But  beside  this,  a  body  of  injunotious  was 


The  Injunctions.  263 


drawn  up,  probably  by  the  compilers  of  the  Prayer 
Book,  which  was  circulated  throughout  the  country 
(June,  1559).  With  regard  to  the  first  of  these  in- 
junctions— concerning  images — a  considerable  con- 
troversy arose,  the  Queen  at  first  desiring  that  they 
should  be  retained  as  a  means  to  stir  up  devotion. 
But  the  refoimuig  divines  represented  to  her  the 
danger  of  encouraging  a  proceeding  which  was  con- 
trary to  the  law  of  God,  and  had  been  forbidden 
under  King  Edward.  So  the  Queen  wh.'le  not  order- 
ing the  images  to  be  removed  out  of  the  Churches, 
declared  that  no  virtue  should  be  ascribed  to  them. 
The  next  was  on  Clerical  Matrimony.  "  It  was  no- 
where declared,"  said  the  injunction,  "neither  in  the 
Scriptures,  nor  by  the  primitive  Church,  that  priests 
might  not  have  wives."  Still,  to  avoid  scandal,  it 
was  ordered  "  that  no  priest  or  deacon  should  marry 
without  allowance  from  the  Bishop  of  the  diocese, 
and  two  justices  of  the  peace,  and  the  consent  of  the 
woman's  parents  or  friends."  As  regards  dress, 
the  Clerg}'  were  required  to  use  habits  according  to 
their  degrees  in  the  Universities.  Directions  were 
then  given  respecting  Church  ornaments  and  wor- 
ship, as  kneeling  in  prayer,  and  showing  reverence 
at  the  name  of  Jesus.  It  was  further  explained  tluvt 
the  Queen,  in  claiming  the  supremacy,  did  not  assert 
any  power  or  right  of  ministration,  but  simply  of 
rule  and  government.  As  regards  altars,  she  ordered 
that  none  should  be  taken  down  without  the  consent 
of  the  Curate  and  Church  wardens  ;  and  "  the  holy 
table  in  every  Church  to  be  decently  made  and  set 
in  the  place  where  the  altar  stood,  and  so  to  stand 


264 


The  Anglican  Reformation. 


saving  when  the  Communion  of  the  Sacrament  is  to 
be  distributed,  at  which  time  it  shall  be  so  placed  in 
good  sort  within  the  Chancel  as  whereby  the  minis- 
ter may  be  more  conveniently  heard  of  the  commuui- 
cants."  Finally  the  Sacramental  Bread  was  to  bo 
made  round  and  plain  without  any  figure  on  it,  but 
broader  and  thicker  than  the  cakes  formerly  used  in 
public  Masses. 

In  some  respects  the  Commissioners  went  beyond 
the  requirements  of  the  injunctions.  For  example, 
they  took  down,  broke,  and  burned  images,  cruci- 
fixes, and  crosses.  In  some  places  they  destroyed 
copes,  which  were  legal  garments,  vestments,  altar 
cloths,  books,  banners,  and  rood  lofts.  It  would  seem, 
however,  that,  there  were  no  serious  excesses;  and, 
if  many  were  pained  by  the  destruction  of  sacred 
objects,  others  certainly  wished  to  carry  the  work 
still  further.  It  should  be  mentioned  that  these 
Commissioners,  nineteen  in  number,  known  as  the 
Court  of  Higli  Commission  in  Causes  Ecclesiastical, 
lasted  for  eighty  years,  and  the  court  was  finally 
abolished  by  16  Charles  I.  c.  11,  on  the  ground  of  its 
unconstitutional  character. 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 

THE  CONSECRATION  OP  PARKER. 

HERE  now  remained  for  the  Queen  the 
serious  work  of  completing  the  Anglican 
Episcopate.  The  man  whom  she  deter- 
mined to  put  at  the  head  of  the  Church 
v;as  Matthew  Parker,  a  man  sign.ally  adapted  for  the 
time  in  which  he  lived,  and  the  work  he  had  to  per- 
form. There  was  only  one  objection  to  Parker, 
namely  that  he  was  a  married  man,  and  had  no  in- 
tention of  partit!g  with  his  wife,  as  Cranmer  had 
been  forced  to  do.  But  the  reasons  for  his  appoint- 
ment overweighed  the  objections.  Parker  was  born 
in  1504,  ordained  in  1527 ;  in  1533  became  Chap- 
lain to  Anne  Boleyn,  and  in  1537  to  Henry  VIII. 
In  1544  he  became  Master  of  Benet  College,  Cam- 
bridge ;  and  in  1547  he  married.  Undf?r  Edward 
VI.  he  became  Dean  of  Lincoln.  During  the  reign 
of  Mary  he  lived  in  retirement ;  and  at  her  death 
Elizabeth  thought  of  him  as  the  fittest  man  for  the 
great  office  to  wliich  she  designed  to  raise  him.  He 
was,  in  many  ways,  a  man  after  her  own  heart, 
thoroughly  convinced  as  to  the  principles  of  the 
Reformation,  yet  having  little  sympathy  with  the 
lengths  to  which  some  extreme  men  were  inclined 
to  proceed,  nor  had  he  the  least  desire  to  fall  back 
upon  the  medisBval  usages  which  had  been  left  be- 

36i 


266  Tlie  AiKjlican  Reformation. 


hind.  He  was  a  man  of  large  learning,  deepened 
and  mellowed  by  the  five  years  spent  in  retirement, 
and  of  broad  and  comprehensive  views,  although  not 
witliout  energy  and  resolution  in  administering  the 
law  of  the  Church. 

It  was  not  Ljng  before  Parker  was  thought  of  for 
the  vacant  Archbishopric.  So  early  as  the  9th  of 
December,  155S,  Sir  Nicholas  Bacon  wrote  to  him  to 
come  up  to  London ;  and  this  request  was  repeated 
more  than  once,  as  he  seemed  disinclined  for  high 
preferment,  to  which  he  judged  that  he  was  de- 
signed. His  health,  he  said,  wjis  far  from  good,  and 
he  should  prefer  some  quiet  position  in  which  he 
might  be  free  from  the  cares  of  government.  But 
the  Queen  had  a  great  remembrance  of  Iiis  kindness 
to  her  as  a  girl,  and  he  was  held  in  high  esteem  b}'- 
Bacon  so  that  they  would  not  accept  his  refusal, 
although  it  was  more  than  half  a  year  before  he  was 
brought  to  consent. 

The  Conge  d'  illre  was  issued  on  the  18th  of  July, 
1559.  On  August  1st  he  was  elected,  and  on  Sep- 
tember 9,  an  order  for  his  consecration  was  given 
under  the  Great  Seal. 

It  is  necessary  to  give,  in  some  detail,  an  account 
of  Parker's  consecration  ;  and  it  is  hardly  possible 
to  do  so  without  assuming  an  attitude  more  or  less 
polemical.  Here  the  Anglican  finds  the  root  from 
which  he  draws  his  valid  orders ;  whilst  the  Roman 
tiiiuks  he  is  able,  by  at  least  bringing  into  doubt  the 
validity  of  Parker's  consecration,  to  cast  doubt  upon 
the  whole  Anglicnn  succession.  The  weak  point  in 
the   Roman  position  would  seem  to  bo  that  their 


Roman  views  of  Parker's  Consecration.       267 


controversialists  liave  bo  often  changed  their  mode 
of  attack.  If  it  is  impossible  to  describe  the  occur- 
rences of  this  period  without  prejudice  or  bias,  an 
e£fort  will  at  least  be  made  to  state  the  facts  with 
clearness  and  accuracy. 

Three  bishops  were  named  as  consecrators  of 
Parker,  Tunstall,  Bourne,  and  Poole ;  but  they  re- 
fused to  act.  Then  a  commission  was  issued  to 
Kitchin,  of  Llandaff,  Barlow,  formerly  of  Bath  and 
Wells,  Scory,  formerly  of  Chichester,  Coverdale,  late 
of  Exeter,  HodgUins,  Suflfragan  of  Bedford,  John, 
Suffragan  of  Thetford,  and  Bale,  late  of  Ossory,  em- 
powering them,  or  any  four  of  them,  to  consecrate. 
Kitchin,  although  he  had  taken  the  oaths,  declined 
to  act.  Barlow,  Scory,  Coverdale,  and  Hodgkius 
consented.,  The  election  of  Parker  was  confirmed  at 
Bow  Church  in  Cheapside,  December  9,  and  on  De- 
cember 17  he  was  consecrated  according  to  tlie 
ordinal  in  the  Second  Book  of  Edward  VI.  in  the 
Cliapel  of  Lambeth  Palace.  This  consecration  is  not 
merely  recorded,  but  minutely  described,  in  the  Lam- 
beth Register,  whilst  a  transcript  of  this  portion  of 
the  Register  is  also  preserved  in  Corpus  Christi  Col- 
lege, at  Cambridge,  and  it  is  confirmed  by  incidental 
testimony. 

In  the  first  place  it  is  denied  by  Roman  Contro- 
versialists that  this  Consecration  ever  took  place ;  and 
furtlier  that,  if  it  did  take  place  it  was  not  valid. 
The  first  of  these  contentions  is  now  generall}'^  aban- 
doned, and  the  ground  on  which  tlie  second  was 
maintained  is  now  changed ;  so  that  we  might  leave 
nearly  all  the  older  history  of  this  controversy  un- 


268  The  Anglican  Reformation,    " 

touched,  were  it  not  that  there  is  always  a  danger  of 
its  being  revived. 

The  fust  objection  brouglit  against  Anglican  orders 
was  that  of  Harding,  in  his  controversy  with  Jewell, 
who  denied  tlieir  validity  on  the  ground  that  they 
had  not  been  conferred  in  accordance  witli  the  Roman 
Ritual.  Then  came  Stapleton,  whose  objection  was, 
that  they  were  invalid  because  England  was  sepa- 
rated from  Rome.  Tins  would  seem  to  raise  the 
question  of  jurisdiction  which,  apparently,  has  been 
abandoned  of  late.  Then  it  was  said,  there  was  no 
laying  on  of  hands.  Then  came  tlie  Nag's  Head 
fable,  which  hardly  any  respectable  Roman  Catliolic 
will  now  so  much  as  name. 

Tiie  chief  questions  to  be  answered  are  these :  1. 
Was  Parker  consecrated  at  Lambeth?  2.  Was  he 
consecrated  by  those  who  had  the  power  to  conse- 
crate? 3.  Was  the  form  used  sufficient  for  the  pur- 
pose ?  4.  Was  be  a  fit  candidate  for  Episcopal 
consecration  ? 

According  to  the  Nag's  Head  story,  there  was  no 
consecration  at  all.  Scory,  one  of  the  bishops 
named  in  the  commission,  went  up  to  Parker  and 
some  of  the  other  bishops,  who  were  assembled  at 
the  Nag's  Head  Tavern  in  Cheapside,  and,  laying  a 
Bible  on  their  heads,  told  them  to  rise  up  bishops. 
The  story  hardly  deserves  examination,  yet  a  few 
remarks  may  be  offered  upon  it. 

In  the  first  place,  it  was  never  heard  of  for  forty 
years  after  the  time  of  the  consecration  of  Parker. 
Further,  the  story  is  told  on  the  alleged  authority  of 
Neale,  who  was  chaplain  to  Bisliop  Bonner.     But 


The  Nag's  Head  Fable.  269 


although  Bonner  had  a  controversy  witli  Home  of 
Wincliester,  as  to  the  reality  of  his  Episcopal  char- 
acter, this  story,  which  Bonner  must  have  known, 
if  it  had  been  true  or  even  current  in  his  days,  was 
not  once  referred  to  by  him.  When  it  was  made 
public,  there  was  no  one  alive  who  professed  to 
know  anything  about  it.  Morton,  Bishop  of  Dur- 
ham, had  been  given  as  an  authority,  but  it  was  sol- 
emnly denied  by  Morton  on  liis  deathbed.  The 
story  is  also  inconsistent  with  known  facts  since  it 
represents  that  at  the  same  time  other  men  besides 
Parker  were  in  this  way  made  bishops,  whose  con- 
firmations are  known  to  have  taken  place  at  a  subse- 
quent period.  But  perhaps  we  have  already  given 
to  this  absurd  fable  more  attention  than  it  deserves. 
To  return  to  the  positive  evidence  of  the  conse- 
cration. In  the  Register  and  in  the  papers  at  Cor- 
pus Christi  College  it  is  set  forth  that  Parker  was 
(jonsecrated  by  Barlow,  formerly  Bishop  of  Bath  and 
Wells,  and  by  Hodgkins,  Suffragan  of  Bedford,  both 
of  whom  had  been  consecrated  in  accordance  with 
tiie  Roman  ritual  under  Henry  VIII.,  and  by  Scory, 
formerly  Bishop  of  Chichester,  and  Coverdale,  for- 
merly of  Exeter,  who  had  been  consecrated  accord- 
ing to  the  ordinal  of  Edward  VI.  This  consecration 
is  declared  to  have  taken  place  at  Lambeth  on  Sun- 
day the  17th  of  December,  1669,  a  date  which  ac- 
cords perfectly  with  the  known  circumstances  of  the 
case.  What  is  the  answer  to  this  evidence  ?  It  is 
alleged  that  the  Register  has  been  forged.  On  what 
grounds  does  this  allegation  rest?  It  is  said  that  it 
was  not  published  for  fifty  years  after  the  alleged 


270  The  Anglican  lieformation. 

consecration,  as  though  it  were  usual  to  publish  the 
contents  of  Registers,  which  are  always  open  to  in- 
spection. Moreover  it  was  actually  referred  to  in 
1572,  during  Parker's  lifetime ;  and  it  was  published 
as  soon  as  the  promulgation  of  the  Nag's  Head  story 
rendered  it  necessary. 

The  Register  has  been  carefully  examined  by  the 
most  experienced  eyes,  and  there  is  no  difference  be- 
tween the  writing  of  this  part  and  that  which  fol- 
lows ;  60  that,  if  tliis  is  a  forgery,  the  same  must  be 
said  of  all  the  four  hundred  and  eleven  leaves  of  the 
fn*st  volume  of  the  Register;  and  also  that  other 
Registers  have  been  forged  in  order  to  correspond 
witli  this ;  and  that  the  documents  in  Corpus  Christi 
College  are  also  forgeries,  whereas  these  documents 
were  quite  unknown  to  Mason  when  he  first  pub- 
lished the  Lambeth  Record,  which  he  was  accused 
by  Roman  Catholics  of  having  forged  I  Another 
corroborative  proof  is  found  in  one  of  the  Zurich 
letters,  written  to  Peter  Martyr  within  a  month  of 
the  time,  speaking  of  the  consecration  as  having 
taken  place  at  the  time  given.  The  same  date  is 
given  in  tlie  Archbishop's  own  diary  and  in  Machyn's 
diary.  jMoreover,  the  old  Earl  of  Nottingliam  had 
been  present,  and  declared  when  the  Nag's  Head 
story  came  out,  that  it  was  at  Lambeth ;  and  he  de- 
scribed all  the  circumstances  of  the  consecration. 

We  sum  up  in  the  language  of  the  able  and 
learned  Roman  Catholic  historian,  Dr.  Lingard ; 
**  To  this  testimony  of  the  Register  what  could  the 
champions  of  the  Nag's  Head  oppose?  They  had 
one  resource — to  deny  its  authenticity ;  to  pronounce 


Parker* a  Reijister.  271 

it  a  forgery.  But  there  was  nothing  to  countenance 
such  a  supposition.  The  most  experienced  eye  could 
not  discover  in  the  entry  itself,  or  the  form  of  the 
characters,  or  the  color  of  the  ink,  the  slightest 
vestige  of  imposture.  Moreover,  the  style  of  the 
instrument,  the  form  of  the  rite,  and  the  costumes 
attributed  to  the  prelates,  were  all  in  kec[>in<v,  redo- 
lent of  the  theology  taught  in  the  schools  of  Stras- 
burg  and  Geneva.  Besides,  if  external  confirmation 
were  wanting  there  was  the  Archbishop's  diary  or 
journal,  a  parchment  roll  in  which  he  had  been  ac- 
customed to  enter  the  principal  events  of  his  life, 
and  in  which,  under  the  date  of  the  17th  of  Decem- 
ber, 1659,  is  found — *  Consecratus  sum  in  Arch- 
iepiscopum  Cantuarien.  Heul  heul  Domine  Deus, 
in  quse  tempora  servasti  me  I  *  Another  confirmation, 
to  which  no  objection  can  be  reasonably  opposed, 
occurs  in  the  Zurich  letters,  in  which  we  find  Sampson 
informing  Peter  Martyr  on  the  6th  of  January,  1560, 
that  Dr.  Parker  had  been  consecrated  Arclibishop 
of  Canterbury  during  the  preceding  month."  *  Lin- 
gard's  conclusions  were  assailed  by  some  of  his  co- 
religionists during  his  lifetime,  and  defended  by  him. 
It  is  hardly  too  much  to  say  that  they  are  now  al- 
most universally  adopted. 

A  second  question,  however,  arises :  Was  Barlow, 
the  consecrator  of  Parker,  himself  consecrated?  It 
is  said  that  there  is  no  proof  of  this  and  that,  conse- 
quently he  could  not  convey  to  another  what  ho  did 
not  himself  possess.  To  this  there  are  two  answers 
given.     In  the  first  placcv  although  Barlow  presided 

■  Liognrd :  *'  Hist,  of  Euglaod,"  Vul.  YI.  Chap.  i.    Note  DD. 


272  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

at  the  consecration  of  Parker,  he  was  not  strictly  the 
consecrating  bishop,  inasmuch  as  the  words  were 
pronounced,  as  the  Record  carefully  states,  by  all 
the  four.  But  there  is  no  good  reason  for  doubting 
Barlow's  consecration.  It  is  true  that  there  is  no 
existing  record  of  this  consecration,  and  it  is  urged 
that  he  was  so  indifferent  on  such  subjects  that  ho 
probably  did  not  care  to  receive  it.  The  absence  of 
the  record,  however,  is  not  surprising  when  it  is  re- 
membered that  Cranmer's  Register  was  very  care- 
lessly kept,  and  that  it  consists  of  a  number  of  sep- 
arate documents  bound  together  long  after  their 
dates.  There  were,  in  fact,  several  other  bishops,  of 
whose  consecration  there  is  no  doubt,  although  no 
record  of  it  has  been  preserved.  The  letters  patent, 
which  authorized  the  Confirmation  of  Barlow,  com- 
manded the  Archbishop,  with  the  assistance  of  other 
bisliops,  to  consecrate  him,  or  to  give  other  bishops 
a  'commission  to  do  so.  If  they  neglected  to  do  this 
v  bin  a  given  time,  they  forfeited  their  bishoprics. 
W  nen,  moreover,  it  is  remembered  that  Barlow  was 
appointed  by  Henry  VIII.,  not  a  man  who  would 
allow  his  mandate  to  be  disregarded ;  that,  after  be- 
ing nominated  to  St.  Asaph,  he  held  three  other 
bishoprics  in  succession;  that  he  was  formally  ac- 
knowledged as  a  bishop,  and  took  his  seat  both  in 
Parliament  and  in  Convocation ;  and  that  he  joined 
in  consecrating  other  bishops,  it  will  need  a  very 
large  amount  of  credulity  to  admit  that  he  was  all 
the  time  unconsecrated.  Here,  again,  we  cannot  do 
better  than  listen  to  Lingard.  "  It  was  asked  whether 
Barlow  had  been  consecrated  as  well  as  translated, 


'■^■ 


Barhw's  Consecration.  273 

for  both  parties  agreed  that  an  uncoiisecrated  prelate 
could  not  confer  consecration.  Now,  it  happened 
most  vexatiously  that  no  record  of  his  consecration 
was  known  to  exist.  Though  searches  were  repeat- 
edly made  in  every  likely  repository,  no  traces  of  it 
could  be  found,  nor,  I  believe,  has  any  allusion  or 
reference  to  it  been  discovered  to  the  present  day  in 
any  ancient  writer  or  document.  Still,  the  absence 
of  proof  is  no  proof  of  non-consecration.  No  man 
has  ever  disputed  the  consecration  of  Gardiner  of 
Winchester ;  yet  he  was  made  a  bishop  whilst  on  a 
mission  abroad,  and  his  consecration  is  involved  in 
as  much  darkness  as  that  of  Barlow.'  When,  there- 
fore, we  find  Barlow,  during  ten  years,  the  remainder 
of  Henry's  reign,  constantly  associated  as  a  brother 
with  the  other  consecrated  bishops,  discharging  with 
them  all  the  duties,  both  spiritual  and  secular,  of  a 
consecrated  bishop,  summoned  equally  with  them  to 
Parliament  and  Convocation,  taking  his  seat  among 
them  according  to  his  seniority,  and  voting  on  all 
subjects  as  one  of  them,  it  seems  most  unreasonable 
to  suppose,  without  direct  proof,  that  he  had  never 
received  that  sacred  rite,  without  which,  according 
to  the  laws  of  both  Church  and  State,  he  could  not 
have  become  a  member  of  the  Episcopal  body." 

But,  it  is  said  by  some  Roman  controversialists 
that  the  form  of  ordination  was  insufiScient;  and 
that  the  invalidity  of  the  consecration  was  practi- 
cally admitted  by  the  passing  of  an  act  of  Parlia- 

•Some  time  ago  Dr.  Kitchin,  Dean  of  Winchester,  now  of  Dur- 
ham, discovered  the  record  of  Gardiner's  consecration. 

R 


274  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ment,  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  to  legalize 
the  position  of  the  new  bishops.  The  latter  objec- 
tion involves  a  confusion  of  thought  between  the 
validity  and  the  legality  of  a  consecration.  Tlie 
state  of  the  law  was,  at  that  time,  very  uncertain. 
Several  acts  had  been  passed  and  several  had  been 
repealed ;  and  thus  some  older  acts  had  been  re- 
vived ;  so  that  it  was  hardly  possible  to  proceed  with- 
out irregularity.  In  order,  therefore,  to  prevent  vex- 
atious litigation  an  act  was  passed  declaring  the  or- 
dinations to  be  "  good,  perfect,  and  lawful."  There 
was  no  question  of  their  validity ;  but  this  act  set 
at  rest  the  doubt  of  their  legality.  This  objection  is 
now  seldom  urged. 

A  more  serious  question  refers  to  the  form  of  or- 
dination, which  was  used  in  the  consecration  of 
Parker.  This  has  already  been  considered  under  the 
Ordinal  of  Edward  VI.  The  same  may  be  said  of 
the  contention  that  Parker  had  not  been  duly  or- 
dained a  priest.* 

It  is  a  strange  objection  that  the  words  "Accipe 

Sanctum  Spiritum,"  or  their .  English  equivalents 
were  not  used  ;  for  they  actually  were  used,  although 
the}''  were  unknown  to  the  early  pontificals.  With 
regard  to  the  remark  that  the  words  of  consecration 
do  not  refer  to  the  order  intended  to  be  conferred, 
the  same  is  true  of  the  Roman  Ordinal,  and  of  all 
the  ancient  ordinals  of  the  Western  Church,  with 


•  As  already  mentioned,  the  non-delivery  of  the  vessels  is  given, 
by  the  present  Pope,  ns  a  reason  for  the  invalidity  of  Anglican 
orders.  This  ceremony  was  unknown  in  the  Church  for  eight  or 
nine  hundred  years. 


Doctrine  of  Intention.  275 

the  exception  of  that  of  Exeter,  which  was  prob- 
ably never  i:sed. 

It  is  noteworthy  that  the  present  Pope,  Leo  XIII,, 
in  his  Bull  "Apostolicse  Curse,"  makes  the  whole 
question  to  turn  upon  the  sufficiency  of  the  Ordinal 
and  the  intention  of  the  Church  as  expressed  in  the 
service.  With  respect  to  the  former  point,  it  must 
here,  once  more,  be  noted  that  the  denial  of  the 
sufficiency  of  the  Ordinal  involves  a  major  premiss 
which  would  not  merely  destroy  the  orders  of  the 
English  Church,  but  would  underujine  the  founda- 
tion of  the  whole  English  Reformation.  When  it 
is  said  that  the  English  Church  had  no  right  to  fall 
back  on  earlier  forms  of  ordaining  after  these  had 
been  altered  by  the  Catholic  Church,  this  is  a  ques- 
tion which  may  properly  be  argued  in  connection 
with  the  principle  of  the  Reformation.  If  it  can  be 
maintained  that  the  Western  Church  could  not  pos- 
sibly go  wrong,  then  of  course  all  who  oppose  its 
doctrines  or  secede  from  its  communion  are  guilty  of 
the  sin  of  schism,  and  the  question  of  orders  need 
concern  neither  party.  But  a  major  premiss  of  this 
kind  cannot  be  allowed  to  be  brought  in  for  the  de- 
termination of  the  question  before  us. 

On  one  point  the  utterance  of  the  Bull  "  Apostol- 
icse  Curae  "  is  of  importance.  Referring  to  the  defect 
of  intention  **  which  is  equally  essential  to  the  Sacra- 
ment,"  the  Pope  remarks :  "  The  Church  does  not 
judge  of  the  mind  or  intention,  in  so  far  as  it  is  by 
its  nature  something  internal ;  but  in  so  far  as  it  is 
manifested  externally,  she  is  bound  to  judge  of  it. 
When  any  one  has  seriously  and  regularly  made  uso 


•• 


276  77ie  Anglican  Reformation. 

of  the  matter  and  form  required  for  effecting  and 
confeiTing  the  Sacrament,  he  is  considered  by  that 
very  fact  to  have  intended  to  do  what  the  Church 
does.  On  this  principle  rests  the  doctrine  that  a 
Sacrament  is  truly  conferred  by  the  ministry  of  one 
who  is  a  heretic  or  unbaptized,  provided  the  Catholic 
rite  be  employed."  This  is  a  valuable  statement 
and  brings  out  well  the  true  meaning  of  intention. 
These  two  things  are  quite  certain — that  the  Service 
in  the  Edwardine  Ordinal  is  drawn  up  for  the  con- 
secrating of  bishops,  an  intention  which  is,  through- 
out, unmistakable  ;  and  that  the  service  thus  pre- 
scribed was  actually  used  at  the  consecration  of 
Parker.  Following  therefore  the  definitions  of  Leo 
XIII.,  we  conclude  that  there  was  no  defect  of  in- 
tention in  the  Lambeth  consecration  of  1559. 

Different  views  are  taken  of  the  importance  of  the 
episcopal  order  and  succession;  but  these  are  theo- 
logical questions,  which  we  are  not  called  here  to 
discuss.  As  regards  the  question  of  the  actual  con- 
secration of  Parker  and  the  sufficiency  of  the  Ordi- 
nal, these  are  historical  and  archaeological  questions, 
and  the  evidence  by  which  they  are  established  seems 
to  be  full  and  complete. 

Shortly  afterwards  Parker  consecrated  Grindal 
to  be  Bishop  of  London,  Cox  to  Ely,  Sandys  to 
Worcester,  and  Merrick  to  BangOi  At  the  begin- 
ning of  1560,  Young  was  consecrated  to  St.  David's, 
Jewel  to  Salisbury,  Davis  to  St.  Asaph,  and  Guest 
to  Rochester. 


CHAPTER  XIX. 

QUEEN  ELIZABETH  AND  ARCHBISHOP  PARKER. 

E  W  men  possess  the  gifts  that  would  qualify 
them  for  the  difficult  post  which  was  now 
occupied  by  Archbishop  Parker ;  and  even 
his  remarkable  endowments  could  not  pre- 
vent the  office  which  he  held  from  being  a  difficult 
and  an  irksome  one.  In  the  attempt  to  organize  a 
truly  national  Church,  lie  was  required  to  fuse  into 
one  elements  which  were  widely  diverse ;  and  no  man 
was  more  deeply  conscious  of  the  arduous  nature  of 
the  task  than  Parker.  He  was  himself  what  might 
be  called  an  ideal  Anglican,  who  held,  steadfastly 
and  on  intelligent  conviction,  to  the  middle  way  be- 
tween Romanism  and  Continental  Protestantism. 
But  there  were  not  a  great  many  who  were  like- 
minded  with  himself.  There  was  a  large  element  of 
the  old  leaven  of  Romanism  not  yet  purged  out ;  and 
tiie  returning  emigrants  had  brought  back  with  them 
opinions  and  a  spirit  which  were  soon  to  be  embodied 
in  what  was  afterwards  known  as  Puritanism.  Cecil 
was  cordially  with  him,  and  so  was  the  Queen,  yet 
with  some  caprices  of  her  own  which  threatened  to 
give  trouble  to  the  rulers  of  the  Church. 

In  the  first  place,  an  attempt  was  made,  by  the 
nonjuring  bishops,  to  obtain  some  recognition  from 
the  government;  and  the  Emperor  wrote  to  the 
Queen  on  their  behalf,  asking  that  they  might  have 

277 


278  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

certain  churches  in  hirge  towns  assigned  to  them. 
Both  the  Queen  and  the  Archbishop  were  quite  firm 
on  this  point.  Elizabeth  answered  that  these  bish- 
ops had  subscribed  to  tlie  royal  supremacy  in  her 
fatlier's  time,  and  why  should  they  not  do  so  now? 
Slie  wished  to  treat  them  with  all  consideration ;  but 
she  could  not  offend  the  rest  of  her  subjects  by 
granting  the  Emperor's  request;  and  there  was  no 
reason  for  it,  since  there  was  no  new  faith  now  propa- 
gated in  England,  but  "that  which  was  commanded 
by  our  Saviour,  practised  by  the  primitive  Church, 
and  unanimously  approved  by  the  Fatliers  of  tlie  best 
antiquity." 

A  remonstrance  was  addressed  to  Parker  by  Heath, 
the  dispossessed  Archbishop  of  York ;  but  the  answer 
put  an  end  to  the  expectations  which  had  been  based 
on  the  Archbishop's  known  kindness  and  fairness. 
Parker  told  Heath  and  his  friends  that  it  was  the 
fault  of  the  popes  that  had  caused  the  divisions ;  and 
that  instead  of  the  reformers  yielding  "no  subjection 
to  Christ  and  his  Apostles,"  as  the  Roman  party  al- 
leged, he  goes  on,  "we  yield  more  than  the  fathers 
of  the  Romish  tribe  do ; "  and  as  regarded  the  apos- 
tles, he  said  they  received  their  writings  "with  ex- 
acter  obedience  than  Romans  do,"  never  allowing 
the  will  of  man  to  set  the  Scriptures  aside.  The 
nonjuring  bishops  however  were  treated  with  great 
kindness  and  consideration. 

The  relations  of  the  Queen  to  the  see  of  Rome 
must,  in  various  respects,  be  pronounced  to  be  un- 
certain. We  have  already  referred  to  the  alleged 
communications   between    Paul   IV.  and  Elizabeth 


Elizabeth  and  Pius  IV.  279 

There  is  a  similar  doubt  as  to  the  communications  of 
his  successor  Pius  IV.  It  is  said  that,  on  his  acces- 
sion (in  1569),  he  sent  his  apostolic  benediction  to 
Elizabeth,  advising  her  to  put  away  her  present  ad- 
visers, and  follow  his  counsels,  and  he  would  receive 
her  back  to  the  true  fold.  The  genuineness  of  this 
communication  has  been  called  in  question.  There 
seems  to  be  no  such  doubt  respecting  another  letter,  in 
which  his  Holiness  stated  that,  if  the  Queen  would 
give  in  her  submission  to  the  lioly  see,  he  would 
sanction  the  use  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  in- 
cluding the  Communion  Service  and  the  Ordinal. 
Although,  he  said,  there  were  things  omitted  from 
the  book,  yet  it  contained  nothing  contrary  to  the 
truth,  and  it  comprehended  all  that  was  necessary 
for  salvation.  He  would,  therefore,  authorize  the 
use  of  the  book,  if  the  Queen  would  receive  it  on  his 
authority.  It  is  said  that  the  Queen,  in  accordance 
with  })recedents,  refused  to  receive  the  nuncio. 
Queen  Elizabeth  did  not  pretend  to  be  a  Protestant. 
She  spoke  of  herself  as  one  of  the  "  Catholic  poten- 
tates." Put  it  was  too  late  for  any  attempts  at 
**  peace  with  Rome."  The  Roman  see  and  the  English 
crown  were  now  finally  separated  ;  and  the  only  at- 
tempt to  reunite  them  that  lias  ever  been  made  since 
then,  cost  the  English  sovereign  who  made  the  attempt 
his  crown. 

On  the  other  hand,  there  were  difficulties  with 
some  of  the  new  bishops  and  with  the  returned 
exiles.  The  Queen  had  insisted  upon  the  reten- 
tion of  certain  habits  which  the  advanced  reformers 
objected    to.    Even    Jewel    had  a  repugnance   to 


280  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

them.  He  speaks  of  the  vestments  as  the  "habit 
of  the  stage."  He  said  the  advocates  of  tliese 
things  "hoped  to  strike  the  eyes  of  the  people 
with  those  ridiculous  trifles.  These  are  the  relics  of 
the  Amorites."  Men  like  Sampson  went  further. 
He  and  others  were  much  distressed  at  the  prohibi- 
tion of  preaching  which  remained  for  some  time,  and 
the  retention  of  the  crucifix  and  the  lights  in  the 
Queen's  chapel.  Writing  to  Peter  Martyr,  he  re- 
joices that  the  images  have  been  removed  out  of  the 
Church;  but  expresses  his  disapproval  at  the  things 
done  in  the  Queen's  chapel.  "  Three  bishops  offi- 
ciated at  this  altar ;  one  as  priest,  another  as  deacon, 
and  a  third  as  subdeacon,  all  before  this  idol  in  the 
gold  vestments  of  the  papacy;  and  there  was  a  sacra- 
ment without  any  sermon."  In  another  letter  he 
mentions  copes,  and  these  were  probably  the  vest- 
ments worn  on  that  occasion. 

Apart  from  the  difficulties  arising  from  these  ex- 
treme pfirties,  or  rather  in  connection  with  them, 
there  was  the  Queen  to  take  account  of.  Elizabeth, 
it  has  been  said,  was  not  a  religious  woman,  but  she 
had  very  distinct  opinions  on  ecclesiastical  matters, 
and  a  very  strong  resolve  to  give  effect  to  them.  As 
we  have  seen,  she  retained  something  like  the  Mass 
in  her  chapel;  and  she  gave  orders  that  the  roods 
which  had  been  taken  away  from  the  churches  should 
be  restored.  Jewel  declared,  "it  comes  to  this  that 
either  the  crosses  must  be  restored  or  our  bishoprics 
relinquished." 

The  difficulties  which  the  new  Archbishop  had  to 
encounter   were    manifold.     It    was    not  only   the 


Difficulties  of  Parker.  281 

Queen's  persistency  and  the  incipient  Puritanism  of 
some  of  the  bishops  that  he  had  to  endure  and  con- 
ciliate as  best  he  could :  there  was  also  a  great 
anxiety  with  regard  to  the  disposition  of  Church 
property,  especially  the  estates  and  manors  to  which 
reference  has  already  been  made.  In  the  exchanges 
which  were  effected  the  Church  was  generally  a  con- 
siderable loser,  and  in  many  cases  there  was  not 
enough  left  to  provide  for  the  ministrations  of  the 
Church  in  the  Parish  churches.  This  was  the  more 
deplorable  from  the  scarcity  and  inefficiency  of  the 
Clergy.  Jewel  states  that  "  there  is  a  great  and 
alarming  scarcity  of  preachers:  our  schools  and 
universities  are  deserted."  As  a  necessaiy  conse- 
quence, men  imperfectly  educated  were  ordained; 
and  benefices  had  to  be  united.  The  effect  on  the 
life  of  the  Church  was  very  serious. 

The  Queen  took  occasion  from  these  and  other  niat- 
ters,  the  neglected  condition  of  the  churches,  and 
especially  of  the  chancels,  in  many  places,  to  expre*^? 
anew  her  feelings  of  antipathy  to  the  marriage  of  the 
Clergy.  She  had  already  placed  some  restriction 
upon  it;  and  now  came  near  prohibiting  it  altogether. 
As  it  Wcis,  she  extended  the  prohibition  to  the  case  of 
collegiale  churches,  forbidding  the  head  or  any  of 
tlie  members  of  such  establishments  to  have  "his 
wife  or  other  woman  to  abide  and  dwell  in  the  same, 
or  to  frequent  or  haunt  any  lodging  within  the  same, 
on  pain  of  degradation."  Parker,  who  was  tenderly 
attached  to  his  wife,  was  bitterly  pained  and  grieved 
by  these  proceedings.  Indeed  on  one  occasion  the 
injury  came  still  nearer  to  himself.     After  the  Queen 


282  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


had  been  sumptuously  entertained  by  the  Archbishop 
at  Lambetli,  she  is  said  to  have  expressed  her  grati- 
tude to  Mrs.  Parker  in  the  fuUowiiig  manner.  On 
taking  leave  of  her,  she  appeared  to  hesitate  as  to 
the  proper  manner  of  address.  "  Madam,"  she  said 
at  last,  "I  may  not  call  you  ;  and  Mistress  I  am  loth 
to  call  you.  I  know  not  what  to  call  you  ;  but  yet  I 
thank  you  for  your  good  cheer." 

Amid  all  the  practical  questions  soliciting  the  at- 
tention of  the  Primate,  he  never  forgot  the  impor- 
tance of  asserting  before  the  whole  Church  the  true 
and  Catholic  charav^ter  of  the  Church  of  England. 
In  this  connection  it  may  be  well  to  mention  at  this 
point  the  important  work  done  by  Bishop  Jewel,  al- 
though his  great  "  Apologia "  was  not  published 
until  1562.  We  have  more  than  once  referred  to 
the  position  of  the  Church  of  England  as  equally 
removed  from  Roman  Catholicism  and  poi)ular  Prot- 
estantism, a  position  which  has  been  somewhat  un- 
fairly termed  the  Via  Media,  since  it  was  certainly 
not  adopted  as  a  compromise,  but  upon  a  distinct 
principle.  That  principle  was  the  retention  of  every- 
thing scriptural  and  primitive,  and  the  rejection  of 
everything  mediaeval  which  was  inconsistent  with 
primitive  Christianity  or  superstitious. 

It  would  appear  that  Parker  soon  began  to  con- 
template the  publication  of  some  manifesto  which, 
on  the  one  hand,  he  might  make  clear  not  only  to 
Anglicans  themselves,  but  to  Romans  and  Protes- 
tants, that  the  Anglican  Reformation  was  based  upon 
principles  which  could  be  defended  on  the  grounds 
of  Scripture  and  Reason,  and  which  could  be  ap> 


IW.I  -JP  flp-i  , 


■v,^ 


Parker  and  Jewel.  283 

plied  to  all  the  religious  questions  tliat  might  come 
up  in  controversy.  On  the  other  hand,  he  douJbtless 
hoped  that  the  clear  enunciation  of  those  principles 
might  be  a  means  of  preventing  the  English  Church 
from  drifting  away  from  its  moorings. 

Parker  himself  was  well  qualified  for  such  an  un- 
dertaliing.  He  was  a  man  of  wide  reading  and  con- 
siderable learning;  and  his  largeness  of  view  and  even- 
ness of  temper,  his  freedom  from  all  narrowness  of 
conception  and  sympathy  would  certainly  have  pro- 
duced something  for  which  the  Anglican  Communion 
would  have  been  properly  grateful.  But  it  may  be 
that  his  lowly  estimate  of  his  own  qualifications 
deterred  him  from  the  undertaking,  whilst  the  crush- 
ing burden  of  his  cares  of  government  may  have 
forbidden  the  application  necessary  for  the  purpose. 
Tiie  work  was  therefore  assigned  to  Bishop  Jewel. 

This  '■'  Jewel  of  a  Bishop,"  as  Peter  Martyr 
called  him,  was  born  in  Devonshire  in  1522,  was 
educated  at  Oxford  ;  and  declared  himself  a  reformer 
at  the  accession  of  Edward  VI.  In  1551  he  was  ap- 
pointed to  a  benefice  which  he  lost  on  the  accession 
of  IMary.  He  saved  himself,  however,  from  further 
persecution  by  making  a  kind  of  recantation  ;  but 
almost  immediately  repented  of  this,  and  fled  to  the 
continent,  living  at  Strassburg,  Frankfort,  and 
Zurich  for  four  years.  His  powers  of  thought  and 
speech  had  been  recognized  early  at  Oxford ;  and  he 
returned  to  England  at  the  accession  of  Elizabeth 
with  a  great  reputation  as  a  preacher,  and  with  some 
leaning  towards  the  Swiss  type  of  Protestantism. 
He  was  much  employed  as  an  advocate  on  the  re- 


284  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

forming  side,  and  took  part  in  the  disputation  at 
Westminster. 

Tlie  keynote  of  Jewel's  piincipiil  work  was  struck 
in  a  sermon  preached  at  Paul's  Cross,  June  18, 1559, 
wliile  he  was  still  a  presbyter.  Jewel  was,  we  have 
said,  inclined  to  the  Protestant  side  as  opposed  to 
the  retention  of  images,  vestments,  and  the  like ; 
but  he  had  a  clear  conception  of  the  historical  con- 
tinuity of  the  Church,  and  had  no  notion  of  the  re- 
formed Church  being  a  new  sect  constructed  in  ac- 
cordance with  certain  individual  interpretations  of 
the  New  Testament.  In  a  second  sermon  at  Paul's 
Cross,  he  repeated  the  statements  of  his  first,  main- 
taining the  Catholic  character  of  the  English  Church, 
and  insisting  that  the  characteristic  difference  between 
England  and  Rome  was,  that  the  former  was  primi- 
tive and  the  latter  mediaeval.  "  We  are  come,"  he 
said,  in  language  repeated  in  the  Apology,  "  as  near 
as  we  possibly  could  to  the  Church  of  the  Apostles, 
and  the  old  Catholic  bishops  and  fathers ;  and  have 
directed  according  to  their  customs  and  ordinances, 
not  only  our  doctrine,  but  also  the  sacraments  and 
the  form  of  common  prayer."  He  was  recommended 
by  Parker  for  the  bishopric  of  Salisbury,  and  con- 
secrated, January  21,  1560. 

It  was  as  a  bishop  that  he  next  appeared  at  Paurs 
Cross,  June  18,  preaching  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Eu- 
charist from  I  Corintliians  xi.  23-25.  In  this  sermon 
he  referred  to  a  charge  that,  on  a  previous  occasion,  he 
had  uttered  more  than  he  was  able  to  prove.  Accord- 
ingly, he  said,  he  would  repeat  as  near  as  he  could  call 
them  to  mind  the  words  he  had  then  spoken :    "  If  any 


V  JW,-*'.*'^,''ff*''.'   '-^  ••-'>■,,  I /"''■.»P«VX7)t'i' ■■«■..„  ^v.;:?;  »♦•: 


Jewels  Challenge.  285 

learned  man  of  all  our  adversaries,  or  if  all  the 
learned  men  that  be  alive,  be  able  to  bring  any  one 
sufficient  sentence  out  of  any  old  Catholic  doctor  or 
father,  or  out  of  any  old  general  council,  or  out  of 
the  holy  Scriptures  of  God,  or  any  one  example  of 
the  primitive  Church'*  on  any  of  the  points  in  differ- 
ence  between  themselves  and  the  Roman  Catholics, 
showing  that  these  testimonies  favored  the  Roman 
doctrine,  then,  he  goes  on,  "  as  I  said  before,  so  say 
I  now  again,  I  am  content  to  yield  unto  him  and  to 
subscribe.  But  I  am  well  assured  that  they  shall 
never  be  able  truly  to  allege  one  sentence;  and  be- 
cause I  know  it,  therefore  I  speak  it,  lest  ye  haply 
should  be  deceived." 

Tiie  points  selected  by  Jewel  for  discussion  were 
very  numerous;  but  it  may  suffice  to  note  here 
some  of  the  principal  Roman  tenets  assailed  by  him. 
The  period  during  which  he  challenged  his  adver- 
saries to  show  that  the  assailed  doctrines  and  prac- 
tices prevailed  was  "the  space  of  six  hundred  years 
after  Christ."  The  principal  of  them  were  :  Private 
masses;  communion  under  one  kind;  public  prayers 
in  a  strange  tongue ;  the  supremacy  of  the  Roman 
bishop;  Transubstantiation ;  the  elevation  and  wor- 
shipping of  the  Host ;  the  real,  substantial,  corporal, 
carnal,  or  natural  presence  of  the  Body  of  Christ  in 
the  Sacrament ;  the  worshipping  of  images ;  any 
and  all  of  these  things,  he  said,  he  would  subscribe 
to,  if  they  could  be  proved  to  have  been  recognized 
within  the  period  which  he  named  by  any  old  doctors 
or  councils. 

The  Apology  was  written  in  Latin  and  published 


286  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

in  1562.  A  translation  was  made  into  English  by 
Lady  Bacon,  wife  of  the  Lord  Keeper  and  mother  of 
the  great  Lord  Bacon  ;  and  ahnost  immediately 
translations  were  made  into  a  number  of  foreign 
languages.  The  Apology  received  the  sanction  of 
the  two  archbishops  and  the  Queen  ;  and  by  her 
command  it  was  chained  to  a  lectern  in  every  parish 
church,  beside  the  Bible.  Jewel's  work  came  very 
near  being  published  as  an  authoritative  document 
of  the  Church  of  England,  but  this  was  averted. 
Nevertheless,  its  influence  was  deep  and  wide ;  and 
the  Church  of  England  owes  much  to  its  author's 
learning  and  moderation. 

Several  other  works  were  now  done  in  the  way  of 
completing  the  formularies  of  the  Church  A  Latin 
translation  of  the  Prayer  Book  was  made,  princi- 
pally from  the  first  of  Edward  VI.,  apparently  with 
the  intention  of  giving  to  that  book  an  authority 
coordinate  with  that  of  the  Elizabethan  revision. 
Tlie  old  calendar,  with  the  names  of  many  saints, 
was  now  restored.  In  the  first  Prayer  Book  only 
red-letter  days  had  been  retained.  In  the  second 
the  names  of  St.  George,  St.  Lawrence,  and  St. 
Clement  were  added.  St.  Clement  was  again 
omitted  in  the  Calendar  of  1559.  The  Latin  Prayer 
Book  had  a  great  number  of  names.  Finally  the 
number  in  the  Calendar  was  considerably  reduced. 
Along  with  the  Calendar  there  was  published  a  new 
Lectionarj'-,  in  which  the  lessons  were  made  to  corre- 
spond with  the  subject  of  the  day. 

The  Parliament  met  on  January  12,  1563.  Con- 
vocation met  January  19,  when  Dean  Newell  of  St. 


-.-■■.•■■..., ■-.-■■■T^i-: 


Convocation  of  1563.  287 

Paul's  was  chosen  Prolocutor.  Among  the  first 
things  undertiiken  by  Convocation  was  the  revision 
of  the  Articles,  which  may  be  conveniently  consid- 
ered by  itself.  It  now  became  evident  tliat  the 
foreign  or  puritan  party  had  gained  a  considerable 
accession  of  strength  in  Convocation,  chiefly  in  the 
Lower  House,  although  even  among  the  bishops  they 
had  supporters.  Sandys,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  })ro- 
posed  to  forbid,  by  Act  of  Parliament,  Lay  Baptism 
and  the  use  of  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  that  sacra- 
ment. He  went  so  far  as  not  only  to  move  the  re- 
appointment of  the  commissioners  for  drawing  up 
reformed  canons,  but  endeavored  to  obtain  for  them 
the  power  of  making  laws  binding  upon  the  Church. 
The  Lower  House  at  the  same  time  petitioned  the 
bishops  on  these  points :  1.  Thfit  only  Sundays 
should  be  kept  as  holy  days ;  2.  That  the  minister 
should  read  the  service  turning  to  the  people;  3. 
That  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  baptism  should  be  dis- 
continued; 4.  That  kneeling  at  the  communion 
should  be  optional ;  5.  That  the  surplice  should  suf- 
fice at  all  ministrations ;  6.  That  the  use  of  organs 
should  be  prohibited.  These  resolutions  were  very 
nearly  carried  in  the  Lower  House.  It  is,  therefore, 
evident  that  the  Puritan  leaven  was  working  power- 
fully in  the  Church — destined  to  be  a  cause  of  much 
anxiety  to  her  rulers. 

The  first  book  of  Homilies  had  been  published  in 
the  first  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Edward  VI.;  and 
now  a  second  book  was  put  forth  with  a  preface  by 
Bishop  Cox,  pointing  out  that  this  book  was  a  kind 
of  continuation  of  the  earlier  one  published  in  King 


288  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Edward's  time.  These  Homilies,  like  the  earlier 
ones,  were  intended  to  be  read  from  the  pulpit,  in- 
stead of  sermons.  It  has  been  generally  supposed 
that  the  Homilies  were  of  a  Puritan  character ;  and 
it  is  true  that  they  set  forth  the  doctrine  of  justifica- 
tion by  faith  alone ;  which,  however,  when  rightly 
understood,  is  by  no  means  a  doctrine  peculiar  to 
Puritanism.  Yet,  along  with  this,  the  Homilies 
recognize  the  Catholic  principle  of  submission  to 
early  testimony,  and  especially  to  the  first  four 
councils ;  and  they  assign  a  sacramental  character  to 
ordinances  which  have  not  been  stamped  as  Sacra- 
ments by  Protestants.  It  is  a  small  thing  to  say  that 
the  Homilics  teach  regeneration  in  baptism,  since 
nearly  all  the  Protestant  and  Reformed  Confessions  do 
the  same  ;  but  they  also  speak  of  the  Holy  Eucharist 
in  terras  which  some  of  the  bodies  represented  by 
those  confessions  would  by  no  means  approve. 

In  close  connection  with  the  publication  of  the 
Homilies  came  the  project  of  providing  an  author- 
ized version  of  the  English  translation  of  the 
Scriptures.  We  have  already  referred  to  the  work 
done  by  Tyndale,  Coverdale,  and  Rogers ;  the  last 
published  under  the  name  of  Thomas  Matthew 
(1537).  From  this  Bible,  which  was  a  combination 
of  the  labors  of  Tyndale  and  Coverdale,  all  later  re- 
visions have  been  successively  formed.  "  In  that  the 
general  character  and  mould  of  our  whole  version 
was  definitely  fixed.  The  laborers  of  the  next 
seventy-five  years  were  devoted  to  improving  it  in 
detail."  1 

"  Westcott:  "  History  of  the  English  Bible,"  p.  73.     • 


The  English  Bible.  289 

The  next  revision,  the  Great  Bible,  was  brought 
out  under  the  supervision  of  Coverdiile,  and  was  pub- 
lished in  1640.  This  was  the  Bible  copies  of  which 
were  placed  in  all  the  parish  churches,  six  of  them 
being  set  up  "in  certain  convenient  places  of  St. 
Paul's  Church." 

Du.ing  the  reign  of  Queen  Mary  the  reading  of 
the  Bible  was  discouraged,  and  no  English  Bible 
was  printed.  Rogers  and  Cranmer  suffered  martyr- 
dom, and  Coverdale  with  difficulty  escaped  to  the 
continent.  Copies  of  the  Scriptures  that  had  been 
set  up  in  the  Churches  were  burnt.  But  the  exiles 
were  doing  something  towards  making  the  Bible 
known :  at  the  close  of  Mary's  reign  the  Genevan 
version  of  the  New  Testament  was  printed — "a 
work  destined  to  influence  very  powerfully  our 
authorized  version."  The  German  New  Testament 
was  publislied  in  1557 ;  but  three  years  afterwards 
the  whole  Bible  was  brought  out,  dedicated  to  Queen 
Elizabeth  (15G0)  ;  and  soon  became  the  most  popular 
version  of  the  Scriptures  among  English  readers. 
Nor  was  this  appreciation  of  the  work  unjustified* 
for  the  revisers  had  honestly  done  their  best  to 
represent  in  English  the  meaning  of  the  original. 

When  Queen  Elizabeth  ordered  the  Bible  to  be 
set  up  in  all  the  Churches,  the  Great  Bible  was  what 
we  might  call  the  authorized  version ;  but  the  Gen- 
evan version  made  people  acquainted  with  its  de- 
fects ;  and  Parker  took  measures  for  the  revision  of 
the  older  version.  The  same  method  was  adopted  as 
with  tlie  revision  made  under  King  James.  The 
whole  Bible  was  divided  into  "  parcels,"  which  were 
S 


290  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

distributed  among  learned  men,  who,  after  examina- 
tion, sent  them  back  with  their  comments  to  the 
Archbishop,  who  was  to  put  the  last  touch  to  them 
and  have  them  printed  and  published. 

Among  those  who  assisted  were  Bishop  Sandys 
of  Worcester,  Bishop  Guest  of  Rochester,  and 
Bishop  Cox  of  Ely ;  and  at  last,  in  1668,  the 
**  Bishops'  Bible  "  appeared  in  a  magnificent  volume, 
without  any  dedication;  but  the  preface  expresses 
the  sense  of  the  translators,  that,  while  they  had 
done  their  best,  there  was  much  yet  to  be  accom- 
plished. It  is  not  completely  known  who  were  the 
revisers;  although  it  is  certain  that  eight  of  them 
were  bishops,  and  from  them  the  book  received  its 
title  of  the  "Bishops'  Bible."  The  use  of  it  was 
sanctioned  by  Convocation  in  1571. 

Another  provision  of  Convocation  for  the  instruc- 
tion of  the  people  was  the  drawing  up  of  a  longer 
Catechism.  This  was  done  by  Dean  No  well  on  the 
basis  of  a  Catechism  written  by  Poynet,  Bishop  of 
Winchester,  which  had  been  approved  by  Convoca- 
tion in  the  time  of  Edward  VI.  This  Catechism 
was  a  meritorious  composition,  and  is  still  worthy 
of  study  as  illustrating  the  theological  thought  of 
the  period ;  but  it  was  composed  under  Calvinistic 
influence,  and  Parker  saw  that  it  would  be  of  serious 
effect  to  give  it  the  approval  of  the  Church ;  and  so 
he  prevented  its  being  sanctioned  by  the  upper  house 
of  Convocation.  It  was  ultimately  published  in 
1670  with  a  dedication  to  the  Archbishop,  for  which 
the  Church  was  not,  in  any  way,  responsible.  Those 
who  would   regard  the    adoption  of   the  Geneva 


Act  of  Supremacy.  291 

Biblo  and  Nowell's  Catechism  as  an  infringement  oil 
the  Catholic  principles  of  the  English  Church,  will 
do  well  to  remember  how  much  they  owe  to  the 
moderation,  comprehension,  and  firmness  of  Arch- 
bishop Parker. 

A  second  Act  of  Supremacy,  of  a  more  severe  char- 
acter than  the  earlier  one,  was  passed  by  this 
Parliament,  requiring  the  oath  to  be  taken  by 
several  classes  not  mentioned  in  the  previous  act; 
particularly  those  who  should  condemn  the  cere- 
monies of  the  Church  or  assist  at  the  celebration  of 
any  private  mass.  Such  persons,  if  they  refused  the 
oath  a  second  time,  were  to  be  held  guilty  of 
treason,  and  were  liable  to  bo  put  to  death.  One 
instance  of  the  application  of  the  Act  was  the  tender- 
ing of  the  oath  to  Bonner,  by  Howe,  Bishop  of 
Winchester.  Bonner  raised  the  question  of  the 
legality  of  Howe's  consecration,  which  led  to  the 
passing  of  the  Act  mentioned  in  the  chapter  on  the 
Consecration  of  Parker. 


CHAPTER  XX. 

THE  ARTICLES   OF   RELIGION. 

HE  Articles,  now  thirty  nine,  originally 
forty-two,  or  even  forty -five  in  number, 
constitute  an  important  part  of  the  Angli- 
can Reformation ;  and  have  been  differ- 
ently viewed  by  different  schools.  The  saying  that 
tlie  Church  of  England  had  a  Popish  Liturgy,  a 
Calvinistic  Creed,  and  an  Arminian  Clergy  had  just 
that  superficial  semblance  of  truth  which  helped  to 
conceal  its  falsity.  For  the  reformed  services  are 
not,  and  never  have  b^en.  Popish.  The  Articles  are 
not  Calvinistic,  a  fact  proved  by  the  subsequent 
attempt  to  make  them  so;  and  the  Clergy  have 
never,  as  a  class,  been  Arminian,  except  in  their  op- 
position to  Calvinism. 

There  can  be  no  doubt,  however,  the  Articles  do 
represent,  and  were  intended  to  represent,  the  Prot- 
estant side  of  the  English  Church,  although  certainly 
not  to  the  negation  or  ignoring  of  the  Catholic  side. 
They  were  also  intended  to  protest  not  merely 
against  mediaeval  corruptions  of  the  primitive  faith  ; 
but  also  to  warn  against  the  manifold  errors  which 
came  in  the  wake  of  the  newly-asserted  liberty  of 
thought.  For  these  reasons  they  have  always  been 
the  favorite  document  of  the  Protestant  and  Puritan 
members  of  the  Church,  whilst  they  were  never 
liked  by  the  reactionary  school,  and  were  regarded 

292 


Significance  of  the  Articles.  293 

with  sometliing  of  aversion  and  apprehension  by  the 
Latitudinaiians.  The  latter  made  an  attempt  to 
show  that  they  were  mere  "articles  of  peace;" 
whilst  the  former  qualified  them  as  susceptible  of  a 
non-natural  sense. 

If  by  "  articles  of  peace  "  it  is  meant  that  men 
might  hold  what  opinions  they  pleased,  so  long  as 
they  did  not  openly  contradict  any  of  the  Articles, 
it  is  enough  to  say  that  no  honest  man  could  attach 
his  name  to  the  document  in  that  sense.  On  the 
other  hand,  it  is  quite  certain  that,  as  formularies  of 
this  kind  grow  old,  and  words  gain  new  meanings, 
it  is  of  necessity  that  some  liberty  of  interpretation 
should  be  allowed  to  subscribers ;  and  this  has  been 
done.  As  regards  the  other  plea,  that  the  Articles 
may  be  taken  in  a  non-natural  sense,  it  is  superfluous 
to  remark  that  the  phrase  is  not  happily  chosen,  and 
its  obvious  meaning  is  indefensible.  At  the  same 
time,  it  was  certainly  intended  that  the  Articles, 
like  the  services,  should  comprehend  different 
schools  of  thought ;  and  indeed  it  was  hoped,  by  a 
wise  comprehensiveness,  to  include  the  whole  people 
in  the  one  Church.  Yet  this  was  not  to  be  done  by 
obliterating  all  doctrinal  outlines.  The  Articles 
were  intended  to  declare  the  Catholicity  of  the 
English  Church,  as  well  as  its  independence  and 
liberties;  and  also  to  clear  it  from  all  complicity 
with  those  errors  of  doctrine  and  faults  of  practice 
which  had  been  sanctioned  by  some  of  the  new 
Protestant  sects. 

It  has  been  well  remarked  that  the  true  criticism 
of  a  doctrine  is  its  history ;  and  if  we  really  wish  to 


294  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

understand  the  meaning  of  the  Articles,  and  do  not 
rather  want  to  defend  the  meaning  which  we  may 
have  foisted  into  them,  we  shall  best  succeed  by  a 
careful  study  of  their  history,  which,  however,  can 
here  be  given  only  in  outline.^ 

Some  account  has  already  been  given  of  the  doc- 
trinal formularies  which  were  drawn  up  before  tho 
reign  of  Edward  VI.  It  is  said  that  the  death  of 
Henry  filled  the  enemies  of  the  Reformation  with  joy  ; 
but  the  hopes  which  they  cherished  were  speedily 
blighted.  The  so-called  Reformation  under  Henry 
VIII.  was  a  mere  casting  off  of  a  tyranny,  without 
removing  the  features  of  the  mediaeval  system  which 
the  real  reformers  regarded  as  corruptions.  This 
was  done  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.  by  the  removal 
of  those  features  from  the  public  services,  and  the 
drawing  up  of  the  Articles  of  Religion.  The  leader 
in  both  of  these  works  was  Archbishop  Cranraer. 

We  have  already  touched  upon  the  different  phases 
in  Cranmer's  doctrinal  convictions;  and  we  need  here 
only  refer  to  one  characteristic  to  which  the  Angli- 
can communion  owes  an  inestimable  debt,  namely, 
the  conservative  temper  in  which  every  department 
of  his  work  was  carried  out.  The  contrast  between 
Cranmer  and  Calvin  in  this  respect  has  been  well 
pointed  out  by  Archbishop  Lawrence:  Calvin,  he 
says,  "  chose  rather  to  become  an  author  than  a  com- 
piler, preferring  the  task  of  compiling  a  new  Liturgy 
to  that  of  reforming  an  old  one."  Cranmer's  con- 
servatism is,  of  course,  more  obvious  in  the  services 

•  The  reader  who  wishes  to  go  more  deeply  into  the  snbject  will 
naturally  ret'tir  to  Hardwick's  "History  of  the  Articles." 


Origin  of  the  Articles.  295 

than  in  the  Articles ;  but  it  is  not  absent  from  either; 
and  it  is  also  conspicuous  in  the  Homilies.  There  is 
no  reason  to  doubt  the  solemn  testimony,  already 
noticed  as  given  on  the  occasion  of  his  martyrdom, 
that  he  had  never  meant  to  believe  or  teach  any- 
thing contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
but  simply  to  set  forth  that  which  had  been  held  by 
*'  the  most  holy  and  learned  Fathers  and  Martyrs  of 
the  Church." 

It  has  been  noticed  that  whilst  the  first  Prayer 
Book  appeared  in  1549  and  the  second  in  1652,  the 
Articles  were  not  published  until  1553,  the  last 
year  of  King  Edward.  It  has  been  thought  that 
this  delay  arose  from  Cranmer's  hope  of  obtaining 
some  common  Confession  in  which  all  the  reformed 
Churches  should  join.  For  this  purpose  he  entered 
into  communication  with  the  German  and  Swiss  Re- 
formers ;  but  it  was  soon  discovered  that  no  agree- 
ment could  be  got  between  these  two  schools  on  the 
subject  of  the  Eucharist. 

It  is  believed  that  a  document  was  drawn  up  at 
least  as  early  as  1549  which  formed  the  basis  of  our 
present  Articles  ;  and  soon  afterwards  these  Articles 
seem  to  have  been  used  as  a  kind  of  test  for  preachers; 
for  Hooper  writes,  in  the  year  named,  that  the  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury  "  has  some  Articles  of  Reli- 
gion to  which  all  preachers  and  lecturers  in  divinity 
are  required  to  subscribe;  or  else  a  licence  for  teach- 
ing is  not  granted  them." 

It  was  not,  however,  until  1561  that  the  King  and 
Council  directed  the  Archbishop  to  "  frame  a  book 
of  Articles  of  Religion,  for  the  preserving  and  main* 


296  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

taining  peace  and  unity  of  doctrine  in  this  Church, 
that  being  finished  they  niiglit  be  set  forth  by  public 
authority."  It  cannot  be  certain  whether  Crannifr's 
early  Articles  were  a  first  draft  of  the  Forty-two;  or 
a  preliminary  document  of  a  siniilar  character,  al- 
though the  former  supposition  is  the  more  probable. 

The  document  drawn  up  by  Cranmer  was  sub- 
mitted by  him  to  the  other  bishops  some  time  before 
its  publication  (1551),  and  in  the  spring  of  the  fol- 
lowing year  a  communication  came  from  the  Council 
to  the  Archbishop,  asking  whether  the  Articles  which 
had  been  "  delivered  to  the  bishops  "  were  "  set  forth 
by  any  public  authority  according  to  the  minutes." 
They  were  tliereupon  forwarded  to  the  Council,  but 
soon  after  returned  to  the  Archbishop,  who  subjected 
them  to  a  fresh  revision,  supplying  titles  and  some 
supplementary  clauses.  He  then  sent  a  copy  of  them 
to  Sir  William  Cecil  and  Sir  John  Cheke,  asking  for 
their  suggestions.  The  document  was  finally  sub- 
mitted to  the  King  that  he  might  authorize  the 
bishops  to  apply  it  as  a  test  to  the  clergy. 

After  this  the  Articles,  then  forty  five  in  number, 
were  submitted  to  the  scrutiny  of  six  royal  Chaplains, 
among  them  Home,  afterwards  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
and  Grindal,  afterwards  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 
The  title  they  bore  at  that  time  was  "Articles  con- 
cerning an  uniformity  in  Religion."  They  were  re- 
turned to  Cranmer  on  the  20th  of  November,  and 
returned  by  him  to  the  Council  on  the  24th.  It  was 
not,  however,  until  the  19th  of  June,  1553,  that  a 
mandate  was  issued  in  the  name  of  the  King,  to  the 
officials  of  the  Province  of  Canterbury,  requiring 


History  of  Articles.  297 

tliem  to  see  that  the  new  Formulary  was  publicly 
subscribed.  To  some  extent  this  order  was  obeyed,  in 
two  or  three  dioceses,  during  tlie  few  remaining  days 
of  Edward's  life.  The  articles  were,  however,  pub- 
lished in  the  month  of  May,  1553,  under  the  title : 
"  Articles  agreed  on  by  the  Bishops  and  other  learned 
men  in  the  Synod  of  London,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord 
1552  (i.  e.  1653  n.  s.),  for  the  avoiding  of  controversy 
in  opinions,  and  the  establishment  of  a  godly  concord 
in  certain  matters  of  religion."  They  were  also  pub- 
lished in  Latin. 

The  question  lias  been  raised  as  to  what  deter- 
mined the  reformers  in  the  selection  of  the  subjects 
of  the  Articles.  The  quesl'on  has  been  partly  an- 
swered, but  may  receive  some  further  consideration. 

In  the  title  given  to  the  English  edition  of  the 
Articles  they  are  sjiid  to  relate  to  "certain  matters 
of  religion  ; "  and  to  aim  at  the  "establishment  of  a 
godly  concord  and  the  avoiding  of  controversies." 
Two  articles,  the  eighth  (now  ninth)  and  thirty- 
seventh  (now  thirty-eighth)  condemn  errors  on  Origi- 
nal Sin  and  the  community  of  goods,  then  held  by  the 
Anabaptists.  Four  others,  the  last  four  which  have 
now  disappeared,  are  directed  against  errors  respect- 
ing the  future  state  of  men — -namely,  the  thirty- 
ninth,  asserting  that  the  resurrection  of  the  dead  is 
not  already  past ;  the  fortieth,  that  the  souls  of  the 
departed  do  not  perish  with  their  bodies  nor  sleep 
until  the  day  of  judgment;  the  forty-first  against 
Millenarians ;  and  the  forty-second,  declaring  that  all 
men  shall  not  be  saved  at  the  last.  The  twelfth  and 
thirteenth  (now  thirteenth  and  fourteenth)  condemn 


298  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

the  doctrine  of  the  schoolmen  on  merit  and  works  of 
supererogation.  The  twenty-third  (now  twenty-sec- 
ond) Article  "of  Purgatory"  condemned  the  "Romish 
doctrine  concerning  Purgatory,  Pardons,  Worship- 
ping, and  Adoration,  as  well  of  Images  as  of  Reliques, 
and  also  Invocation  of  Saints."  It  is  apparent,  there- 
fore, that  these  Articles  were  directed  equally  against 
tlie  errors  of  Rome  and  those  of  the  self-willed  sec- 
taries who  would  put  no  bridle  upon  their  own  im- 
aginations and  tastes. 

The  Anabaptists,  with  their  many  heresies,  were  a 
sore  trouble  to  the  reformers  in  Germany  and  in  Eng- 
land, and  some  of  the  Swiss  reformers,  with  their 
theories  of  the  sacraments,  seemed  to  rob  them  of  all 
virtue  and  almost  to  deny  their  necessity,  so  that 
the  Anglicans  were  bound  to  protest  that  the  sacra- 
ments were  not  only  "badges  or  tokens  of  Christian 
men's  profession  but  rather  they  be  certain,  sure  wit- 
nesses and  effectual  signs  of  grace." 

The  first  four  Articles  assert  the  Catholic  faith  as 
it  was  established  by  the  great  councils  and  set  forth 
in  the  Creeds,  the  first  two  being  taken  almost  en- 
tirely from  the  Augsburg  Confession.  The  fourth  was 
directed  against  a  certain  semi-docetic  class  of  Ana- 
baptists or  Mennonites  who  denied  that  Christ  had 
taken  true  human  nature.  In  regard  to  th^  eighth 
(now  ninth)  article  "  of  original  or  birth  sin,"  it  was 
certainly  directed  against  the  Pelagians ;  but  it  looks 
as  thougli  it  were  also  aimed  at  the  Roman  doc- 
trine, that  Concupiscence  had  not  the  nature  of  sin. 
It  is  hardly  too  much  to  say  that  this  is  a  mere  ques- 
tion of  definition. 


Authority  of  Articles,  299 

It  will  be  easy  for  the  reader  to  follow  up  the 
references  in  the  various  Articles ;  and  it  may  be  now 
useful  to  notice  by  what  authority  the  whole  collec- 
tion was  promulgated,  noi;  a  very  easy  question  to 
answer.  Were  the  Articles  submitted  to  Convoca- 
tion, or  were  they  promulgated  by  the  mere  authority 
of  the  King  and  his  Council  ?  The  latter  is  assumed 
to  be  the  truth  because  no  record  remains  of  the  ap- 
proval of  Convocation,  and  because  the  Articles  are 
said  to  have  been  agreed  on  "  by  the  bishops  and 
other  learned  men  at  the  Synod  in  London.'*  As, 
however,  no  objection  seems  to  have  been  urged 
against  the  Articles  on  the  ground  that  they  lacked 
synodal  <ipprobation,  it  seems  probable  that  this  had 
been  given  ;  and  it  was  positively  and  publicly  as- 
serted, on  their  revival  in  the  Convocation  of  1563,  that 
they  had  possessed  such  authority.^  These  Articles 
do  not  seem  ever  to  have  been  formally  abolished  un- 
der Queen  Mary:  they  simply  were  tacitly  sup- 
pressed. 

We  have  seen  how  cautiously  Queen  Elizabeth 
went  to  work  on  her  accession  to  the  throne,  silen- 
cing the  pulpits,  putting  a  stop  to  the  abusive 
epithets  of  papist  on  the  one  side  and  heretic  on 
the  other,  forbidding  superstitious  worship  and  also 
indifference  and  contempt  of  holy  things.  We  have 
seen  also  how  she  found  in  Matthew  Parker  a  man 
eminently  qualified  to  carry  on  the  work  of  Thomas 
Cranmer.     His  testimony  is  the  very  echo   of  the 


'The  reader  is  referred  to  Hardwick  for  the  varions  reasons 
\rhich  iDduoed  him  to  believe  that  the  Articles  had  syuodal  ap« 
proval. 


800  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

words  of  his  martyred  predecessor.  "  We  of  the 
Church  of  England,"  he  said,  "reformed  by  our 
late  King  Edward  and  his  clergy,  and  now  by  Her 
Majesty  and  hers  reviving  the  same,  have  but  imita- 
ted and  followed  the  example  of  the  ancient  and 
worthy  fathers." 

It  is  remarkable  that  the  Articles,  apparently 
sanctioned  by  Convocation  and  never  repealed,  seem 
not  to  have  been  referred  to  under  Elizabeth  until 
they  were  brought  up  for  discussion  in  the  Convo- 
cation of  1563.  Even  after  they  had  been  modified 
in  that  Sj'^nod,  subscription  to  them  was  not  enforced 
until  the  Parliament  and  Convocation  of  1571.  In 
the  meantime,  however,  another  test  of  doctrine  was 
provided  for  the  bishops,  namely  the  Eleven  Articles 
of  Religion,  drawn  up  under  the  supervision  of 
Parker  and  with  the  sanction  of  the  Archbishop  of 
York,  to  which  the  clergy  were  required  to  signify 
their  adhesion  on  admission  to  a  benefice,  and  also 
twice  a  year,  immediately  after  the  Gospel  for  the 
day.  These  Articles,  as  far  as  they  went,  resembled 
the  Forty-two,  but  with  the  avoidance  of  some  of 
the  burning  questions  of  the  day. 

A  few  words  may  properly  be  given  to  this  For- 
mulary, which,  practically  at  least,  for  a  time  rep- 
resented the  authoritative  teaching  of  the  English 
Church.  The  first  Article  confessed  the  Trinity  in 
Unity ;  the  second,  the  sufficiency  of  Scripture ; 
the  third  declares  the  Church  to  be  the  Spouse  of 
Christ,  and  asserts  that  a  national  Church  has  the 
right  to  regulate  its  ritual.  The  fourth  excludes 
from  office,  ecclesiastical  or  secular,  all  who  have 


Eleven  Articles.  801 


not  been  lawfully  called  thereto  by  "  the  high  au- 
thorities." The  fifth  sets  forth  the  Royal  Supremacy, 
whilst  the  sixth  rejects  that  of  the  Pope.  The 
seventh  declares  the  English  Prayer  Book  to  be 
"  agreeable  to  the  Scriptures,"  also  "  Catholic,  apos- 
tolic, and  meet  for  the  advancing  of  God's  glory."  The 
eighth  declares  for  the  abolition  of  unction,  exor- 
cism, etc.,  in  the  Sacrament  of  baptism,  as  not  pertain- 
ing to  the  substance  of  the  Sacrament.  The  ninth 
pronounces  private  Masses  to  have  been  unknown  to 
the  Fathers  of  the  primitive  Church.  The  tenth  de- 
clares for  communion  in  both  kinds,  and  denounces 
the  withholding  of  the  "mystical  cup"  as  "plain 
sacrilege."  The  eleventh  condemns  the  worshipping 
of  images  and  relics,  and  other  superstitions.  These 
eleven  Articles  served  a  useful  purpose,  and  some- 
thing of  the  kind  was  necessary  until  the  greater 
document  should  be  reinstated ;  and  this  was  done 
by  the  Convocation  of  1563,  and  the  revised  Articles 
were  enjoined  on  the  Clergy  by  the  canons  of  the 
Convocation  of  1571.  To  the  Articles  as  then  re- 
vised we  have  now  to  give  attention. 

In  preparation  for  the  Convocation  which  met 
in  January,  1563,  Parker  had  been  subjecting  the 
Forty-two  Articles  to  a  careful  examination  and 
revision,  assisted  by  Cox  of  Ely,  Guest  of  Roches- 
ter, and  others  of  the  bishops.  Parker's  manu- 
scripts, given  by  him  to  his  College,  Corpus  Christi, 
at  Cambridge,  enable  us  to  follow  the  alterations 
which  were  made  in  the  older  articles.  Some  of 
Parker's  colleagues  would  have  preferred  his  ac- 
commodating the  Articles  more  to  the  Swiss  type, 


802  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

and  regarded  the  Lutherans  as  little  better  than 
*'  Papists  in  disguise."  Yet  it  was  to  a  Lutheran 
Confession,  that  of  Wurtemberg,  little  more  than  an 
echo  of  that  of  Augsburg,  that  Parker  had  chief  re- 
course. Thus  the  fifth  Article  of  the  Thirty-nine, 
"  Of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  which  had  no  place  among 
the  Forty-two,  was  taken  from  the  Wurtemberg  con- 
fession. So  was  the  appendix  to  the  sixth  respect- 
ing the  books  "  of  whose  authority  was  never  any 
doubt  in  the  Church."  And  so  of  several  portions 
of  other  articles. 

But  there  were  other  changes  made.  The  twenty- 
ninth  c\nd  the  thirtieth  of  our  Articles — "of  the 
wicked  which  do  not  eat  the  Body  of  Christ  in  the 
use  of  the  Lord's  Supper,"  and  "  of  both  kinds" — 
have  no  place  among  the  Forty-two.  The  same  is  true 
of  Article  twelve,  "  of  good  works ; "  and  also  of  tho 
twenty-ninth,  directed  against  the  theory  that  mere 
partaking  of  the  Eucharist  brought  a  blessing,  and  the 
twelfth  against  the  rising  antinomianism.  Several  of 
the  other  articles  were  modified.  The  thirty-seventh 
was  new — "  of  the  Civil  Magistrates  " — and  explains 
the  sense  in  which  the  Royal  Supremacy  is  held : 
**  We  give  not  to  our  princes  the  ministering  either 
of  God's  word,  or  Sacraments  ....  but  that 
only  prerogative  which  we  see  to  have  been  given 
always  to  all  godly  princes  in  Holy  Scripture  .... 
that  they  should  rule  all  estates  and  degrees  com- 
mitted to  their  charge  by  God,  whether  they  be  ec- 
clesiastical or  temporal." 

To  the  twenty-eighth  article  "Of  the  Lord's 
Supper  "  after  "  the  plain  words  of  Scripture,"  these 


Changes  in  the  Articles,  303 

words  are  added:  " overthroweth  the  nature  of  a 
sacrament."  Also  the  paragraph  on  the  body  of 
Christ, "  being  given,  taken,  and  eaten  after  a  heavenly 
and  spiritual  manner,"  was  added.  Guest  being  the 
author  of  it.  Besides  these  changes  and  others 
already  mentioned,  the  tenth  of  the  Forty-two,  "  Of 
Grace,"  the  sixteenth,  on  "  Blasphemy  against  the 
Holy  Ghost,"  and  the  nineteenth  on  the  obligation 
of  the  Moral  Commandments,  were  omitted,  part  of 
the  last  being  incorporated  in  our  seventh  article 
"of  the  Old  Testament."  Reference  has  already 
been  made  to  the  dropping  of  the  last  four  of  the  Forty- 
two,  probably  because  the  dangers  from  the  Ana- 
baptists had  passed  away.  A  remarkable  omission 
from  the  article  on  the  Sacraments  (now  the  twenty- 
fifth),  was  the  phrase  "  ex  opere  operate,"  which 
seems  to  have  been  dropped  in  consequence  of  ex- 
planations  given.  On  the  whole,  the  changes  made 
in  these  articles  were  on  the  side  of  toleration  and 
liberality.  They  were  signed  readily  by  a  good 
many  members  of  Convocation  ;  but  others  hesitated. 
By  degrees,  however,  nearly  all  seem  to  have  fallen 
in  (February,  1663).  The  Articles  were  then  printed 
at  the  royal  press.  In  this  printed  copy  the  twenty- 
ninth  article  is  lacking ;  but  it  was  taken  in  again 
by  the  bishops  in  1571,  and  it  is  found  in  all  the 
printed  copies  after  that  date.  The  first  sentence  of 
article  twenty  on  the  authority  of  the  Church  in  con- 
troversies of  faith,  is  found  in  the  edition  authorized 
by  the  Queen,  but  not  in  some  other  copies ;  but 
there  seems  no  doubt  it  was  in  the  copy  signed  by  Con- 
vocation in  1563,  and  it  was  finally  ratified  in  1571. 


804  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

It  has  been  mentioned  that  the  Articles  were 
finally  sanctioned  and  imposed  after  the  Convocation 
of  1571.  In  this  same  Convocation  a  book  of  can- 
ons was  drawn  up  and  introduced  into  the  Upper 
House.  It  never  was  laid  before  the  Lower  House ; 
3'et  the  canons  were  observed  by  the  bishops  in  the 
administration  of  their  dioceses.  As  has  been  re- 
marked by  Dean  Hook,  in  spite  of  several  attempts 
in  dififerent  reigns  to  revise  the  canons,  no  such  re- 
vision or  Reformation  has  ever  been  sanctioned  by 
Parliament,  so  that  the  Church  of  England  is,  at 
this  moment,  under  the  canon  law  of  the  pre-Refor- 
mation  Church,  except  in  so  far  as  that  has  been 
modified  by  statute  law. 


CHAPTER  XXI. 

THE  ADVERTISEMENTS. 

|T  was  not  merely  doctrine  that  needed 
settlement  in  those  times.  Probably 
more  grievous,  because  more  present  to 
the  senses,  was  the  irregularity  in  matters 
of  ritual.  The  special  Eucharistic  Vestments,  sanc- 
tioned by  tlie  rubric  of  the  Elizabethan  Prayer 
Book,  had  fallen  into  disuse.  This,  however,  did 
not  seem  to  distress  Parker  or  the  Queen;  but  the 
actual  state  of  chaos  into  which  the  services  of  the 
Church  seem  to  have  fallen  did  very  seriously  dis- 
quiet them.  Every  one  did  what  seemed  right  in  his 
own  eyes,  and  a  very  considerable  party  were  bent  upon 
resisting  the  plain  commands  of  the  Prayer  Book. 

The  state  of  things  is  described  in  a  forcible 
manner  by  Sir  W.  Cecil.  Some,  he  declares,  say  the 
service  and  prayers  in  the  chancel,  others  in  the 
body  of  the  Church.  Some  keep  to  the  order  of  the 
Prayer  Book ;  others  introduce  Psalms  in  metre. 
Some  use  a  surplice ;  others  are  without  a  surplice. 
In  some  places  the  table  stands  in  the  body  of  the 
Church ;  in  other  places,  in  the  chancel ;  or  again 
altarwise.  Administration  of  the  Communion  is 
done  by  some  with  surplice  and  cap ;  by  others  with 
none.  Some  have  chalices,  some  a  communion  cup, 
others  a  common  cup.  Some  use  unleavened 
bread,  some  leavened.  Some  receive  kneeling,  others 
standing,  others  sitting.     Some  baptize  at  a  font, 

.    t  305 


806  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

some  with  a  basin :  some  make  the  sign  of  the 
cross :  others  do  not. 

The  Queen  bore  these  irregularities  very  impa- 
tiently; and  she  represented  to  the  Archbishop  tliat 
it  was  his  business  to  put  a  stop  to  them.  But  she 
was  unwilling  to  favor  any  fresh  legislation  in  Par- 
liament, so  that  the  responsibility  was  thrown  upon 
the  ecclesiastical  courts;  and,  at  the  same  time, 
while  she  refused  to  tlie  bishops  the  help  which  they 
might  properly  claim,  she  threw  the  responsibility 
off  from  herself. 

Parker  did  his  best  to  give  effect  to  the  Queen's 
orders  for  uniformity.  He  published  a  set  of 
"Articles"  intended  to  bring  about  a  more  uniform 
state  of  things;  but  the  Queen  would  not  have  them. 
Whether  because  they  seemed,  by  their  title,  to  have 
a  doctrinal  significance,  which  Elizabeth  could  not 
endure,  or  whether  because  some  parts  of  them  were 
of  a  doctrinal  character,  she  refused  to  sanction  them. 

This  refusal,  on  the  part  of  the  Queen,  led  to  the 
publication,  by  the  Archbishop,  of  the  Advertise- 
ments, "partly  for  the  due  order  in  the  public  ad- 
ministration of  common  prayers  and  using  the  holy 
sacraments,  and  partly  for  the  apparel  of  all  persons 
ecclesiastical,  by  virtue  of  the  Queen's  Majesty's 
letters  commanding  the  same." 

Parker  wrote  to  Cecil  (March,  1666),  saying  that 
he  had  "weeded  out  of  the  Articles  all  such  of 
doctrine  which  perad venture  stayed  the  book  from 
the  Queen's  Majesty's  approbation,"  and  so  forth. 
A  prominent  part  of  the  Advertisements  was  that 
which   took   up  the  ordering  of  the  ritual  of  the 


The  Advertisements,  807 

Eucharist  from  the  point  to  which  it  had  been 
brought  in  the  Act  of  Uniformity  of  Elizabeth. 
There  can  be  no  question  that  the  Elizabethan 
rubric  sanctioned  the  Vestment,  that  is  the  Chasuble, 
for  the  Celebrant,  and  tunicles  for  the  assistants ; 
and  that  these  were  the  legal  vestments  in  the  reign 
of  Queen  Elizabeth.  But  it  is  equally  certain  that 
tlie  **  vestment,"  properly  so-called,  was  never  worn 
but  only  the  cope  over  the  surplice,  alb,  or  rochet. 

The  Advertisements  gave  a  sanction  to  that 
which,  since  the  accession  of  Elizabeth,  had  been 
customary,  requiring  the  use  of  the  surplice  only  in 
all  parish  churches,  and  the  use  of  the  cope  in  all 
Cathedral  and  Collegiate  churches. 

A  heated  discussion  has  arisen  as  to  whether  these 
Advertisements  were  authorized  by  the  Queen.  The 
Act  of  Uniformity  had  required  that  the  vestments 
should  be  in  use  until  the  Queen  should  take  further 
order.  According  to  one  class,  the  Queen  did 
actually  take  this  order  in  the  Advertisements. 
According  to  another,  these  were  simply  Parker's 
working  theories,  to  which  the  Queen  had  not  given 
her  consent.  One  should  suppose  that  this  contro- 
versy would  have  little  interest  for  our  own  times, 
seeing  that  we  have  fresh  rubrics  for  our  guidance ; 
but  it  is  held  by  some  that  the  meaning  of  our 
rubrics  is  partly  determined  by  the  authority  of 
these  Advertisements,  so  that  it  becomes  necessary 
for  us  to  give  some  slight  attention  to  them. 

Parker's  "  Articles,"  as  they  were  first  called,  were 
sent  to  Cecil,  March  3,  1665,  for  the  signature  of  the 
Queen;    but    this  was   refused.     They  were   then 


808  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

modified  and  issued  with  the  title  of  "Advertise- 
ments." It  is  quite  evident  that  the  Queen  did  not 
at  once  give  them  her  sanction.  "Did  they  receive 
the  royal  authority  at  all?"  This  is  the  question 
which  is  diversely  answered.  There  can  be  no 
question  that  the  Queen  was  earnestly  set  upon  ob- 
taining uniformity,  and,  as  far  as  possible,  dignity,  in 
worship.  Probably  she  would  be  unwilling  to  give 
up  the  special  Eucharistic  Vestment ;  yet,  in  the  ex- 
isting state  of  things,  to  have  the  surplice  in  all  the 
parish  churches  and  the  cope  in  Cathedrals  and 
Collegiate  churches  would  be  a  great  gain.  Still 
the  Queen  was  alwaj^s  reluctant  to  sanction  new 
laws,  as  they  seemed  to  abridge  her  own  preroga- 
tives ;  and  on  the  other  hand,  she  preferred  that  the 
bishops  should  bear  the  odium  of  bringinqr  the  law 
to  bear  upon  recusants. 

The  Archbishop  had  the  concurrence  of  the 
ecclesiastical  commissioners  in  publishing  the  Ad- 
vertisements: but  how  far  had  they  royal  authority? 
The  Queen  did  not  sign  them  when  they  were 
issued  in  1566.  But  the  Archbishop,  in  his  Articles 
of  Inquiry,  1569,  speaks  of  them  as  having  "  public 
authority."  So  Archbishop  Whitgift,  in  1584,  de- 
clares them  to  be  authoritative,  as  do  also  the  canons 
of  1571.  These  canons,  however,  did  not  receive 
royal  confirmation.  But,  finally,  they  are  recog- 
nized as  of  authority  by  the  canons  of  1603 ;  and  in 
tiiese  canons  their  ritual  directions  are  repeated. 
They  are  also  recognized  in  the  canons  of  1640.  It 
may  be  mentioned  that  Mr.  Parker,  an  authority  on 
archseological  and  ecclesiastical  subjects,  and  Lord 


The  Advertisements.  309 

Selborne,  a  great  lawyer,  statesman,  and  churchman, 
debated  this  subject,  tlie  former  holding  that  the  Queen 
never  sanctioned  the  Advertisements,  the  latter  that 
she  did.  What  more  is  necessary  to  be  said  on  the 
subject  may  better  be  considered  in  another  place. 

At  any  rate  Parker  was  resolved  on  liaving  some 
kind  of  order  in  the  Church,  and  he  had  come  to 
think  that,  if  some  of  the  recusants  should  refuse  and 
secede,  it  would  be  all  the  better  for  the  Church.  A 
good  niciny  of  them  were  not  only  Calvinistic  in  doc- 
trine, which  was  the  case  with  most  of  the  Clergy  at 
that  time  :  but  they  were  also  Presbyterian  in  dis- 
cipline. It  is  remarkable  that,  in  their  antipathy  to 
the  surplice,  they  had  not  the  support  of  the  Swiss 
reformers.  It  did  not  seem  a  matter  of  much  im- 
portance to  Bullinger  and  others,  what  garment  was 
worn,  so  long  as  no  hindrance  was  offered  to  the 
publication  of  Christian  truth.  The  English  re- 
formers, who  had  been  engaged  in  struggles  with 
the  Roman  party  under  Mary  had  contracted  a  dis- 
like to  everything  which  they  associated  with  Roman 
doctrine  or  worship. 

In  the  year  1565,  one  hundred  and  forty  of  the 
London  clergy  appeared  before  the  Archbishop  at 
Lambeth,  and  were  required  to  make  the  declaration 
of  conformity  aflQxed  to  the  Advertisements.  All 
but  thirty  made  the  promise.  In  the  next  year  they 
were  again  summoned  before  the  ecclesiastical  com- 
mission, when  sixty-one  made  the  declaration  of  con- 
formity and  thirty-seven  refused.  These  were  de- 
prived or  suspended.  We  are  now  at  the  beginning 
of  the  history  of  modern  dissent  in  England.    The 


310  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

expelled  had  no  mind  to  fall  into  merely  lay  com- 
munion with  the  established  Church.  They  made 
public  the  nature  of  their  ofPence  in  that  they  had 
**  refused  to  wear  the  upper  apparel  and  ministering 
garments  of  the  Pope's  Church,"  representing  that 
these  had  been  derived  from  heathen  sources  and  per- 
verted to  gross  superstition  and  idolatry.  Even  if 
they  were  indifferent,  they  said,  which  they  could 
not  concede,  they  ought  not  to  be  enforced  against 
their  clear  convictions. 

There  was  one  body  that  the  Archbishop  could 
not  reach,  the  University  of  Cambridge.  Oxford 
had  for  some  time  been  under  what  we  should  call 
High  Church  influence ;  but  Cambridge  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  Puritans.  And  here,  in  some  of  the 
colleges,  the  students  refused  to  wear  surplices,  and 
were  supported,  in  their  refusal,  by  the  masters  of 
the  colleges.  By  a  special  privilege,  conferred  by 
Alexander  VI.,  the  universities  had  the  power  to 
licence  twelve  preachers  annually  without  consent 
of  the  bishop.  Hence  these  men  not  only  preached 
without  the  bishop's  licence,  but  also,  like  the  mem- 
bers of  the  religious  orders,  in  their  academical  habits. 
Parker  was  unable  to  get  this  privilege  withdrawn. 

This  was  not  the  only  impediment  to  uniformity. 
There  were  men  in  the  Queen's  Council  who,  with- 
out the  slightest  personal  sympathy  with  Puritan 
sentiment,  put  themselves  forward  as  its  supporters. 
Among  these  the  unprincipled  Earl  of  Leicester  has 
been  mentioned,  who  probably  took  this  attitude  out 
of  opposition  to  Cecil. 

The  Puritans  were  far  from  agreement  among 


The  Universities.  811 


themselves.  Some  of  tlie  deprived  remained  in  com- 
mimiou  with  the  Church,  officiating  as  they  might  find 
opportunity  and  permission.  Some  made  the  dechirn- 
tion,  professed  to  conform,  and  took  every  possible 
opportunity  of  breaking  or  evading  the  law.  Some 
writers  on  this  period  speak  of  this  class  as  being  tlio 
better  affected  to  the  Church ;  but  a  different  judg- 
ment may  be  formed  of  their  conduct.  With  re- 
gard to  those  who  remained  in  the  ministry  of  the 
Church,  and  conformed  to  rules  which  they  disliked, 
living  in  hop'3  of  being  able  to  have  them  changed, 
we  cannot  deny  that  they  were  in  their  rights ;  but 
the  same  thing  can  hardly  be  said  of  those  who  re- 
tained their  posts,  deliberately  intending  to  violate 
the  conditions  on  which  they  were  held.  With  re- 
gard to  those  who  left  and  made  a  beginning  of 
schism  in  the  Anglican  Communion,  we  shall  form 
different  judgments  according  to  our  point  of  view. 
It  has  been  said  that  they  took  the  responsibility  of 
separation  solely  and  entirely  on  the  question  of  the 
garment  to  be  worn  in  Christian  ministrations.  It 
has  also  been  said  that  they  were  the  parents  of  the 
three  hundred  and  eighty  sects  of  the  present  day. 
At  the  same  time,  it  must  be  remembered  that  these 
men  made  great  sacrifices  for  conscience'  sake ;  and 
even  if  they  were  narrow  and  self-willed,  they  were 
in  this  respect  not  unlike  the  great  people  whose 
qualities  they  illustrate.  These  were  the  first 
"  Puritans,"  bearing  a  name  which  was  intended  to 
be  a  reproach,  yet  which  has  associations  which  are 
not  altogether  inglorious. 

The  position  of  the  bishops  was  a  difficult  one. 


812  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Again  they  tried  to  obtain  an  Act  of  Parliament  to 
enforce  subscription  (December,  1566) ;  but  the 
Queen  would  not  hear  of  tliis;  and  although  the 
Bill  passed  in  the  Commons,  she  had  it  stopped  in 
the  Lords,  in  spite  of  the  remonstrances  of  the 
archbishops.  At  the  same  time  she  gave  the  ec- 
clesiastical commissioners  to  understand  that  she  ex- 
pected them  to  do  their  duty  and  to  put  a  stop  to 
unlawful  assemblies.  In  consequence  separatists  to 
the  number  of  a  hundred  were  seized  by  the  sheriffs 
of  London  at  Plumbers'  Hall,  which  they  had  hired  on 
pretence  of  a  wedding.  They  refused  to  make  the 
least  submission,  and  were  put  in  prison ;  but  this 
had  no  effect  in  suppressing  the  movement.  Not 
only  were  the  persecuted  men  convinced  and 
fanatical,  but  they  had  the  support  of  some  of  the 
councillors  who  were  always  glad  to  embarrass  the 
action  of  the  bishops.  After  encouraging  the 
Puritans  to  rebellion,  when  these  were  not  re- 
^:Tessed,  they  were  ready  to  complain  of  the  general 
**  icgligence  of  the  bishops  of  the  realm ! "  The 
Archbishop  was  grieved  and  vexed,  and  did  not  con- 
ceal his  vexation  from  the  Queen,  nor  his  regret  at 
having  accepted  so  thankless  an  office. 

Notwithstanding  the  opposition  of  the  Queen,  it 
became  impossible  to  keep  ecclesiastical  questions 
out  of  Parliament;  and  in  that  which  met  April, 
1571,  a  proposition  was  introduced  for  further  re- 
form, and  a  commission  of  fourteen  was  actually  ap- 
pointed to  confer  with  the  bishops  on  the  subject. 
A  bill  to  compel  subscription  to  the  Thirty  nine 
Articles  was  also  brought  in.    The  temper  of  the 


;-f^ 


The  Thirty-nine  Articles.  813 

Commons  was  shown  by  the  answer  given  by  Went- 
worth,  when  the  Archbishop  suggested  that  the  de- 
tails of  the  measures  should  be  left  in  the  hands  of 
the  bishops.  "No,"  he  exclaimed,  "by  the  faith  I 
owe  to  God,  we  will  pass  nothing  before  we  under- 
stand what  it  is.  That  were  to  make  }ou  popes. 
Make  you  popes  who  list,  we  will  make  you  none." 
However  the  Bill  enforcing  the  Articles  passed  into 
law;  and  required  that  all  ministers  ordained  by  any 
other  formula  than  that  set  forth  in  King  Edward's 
time  and  now  used  should  declare  their  assent  to  the 
Articles  and  subscribe  them  before  the  bishop ;  and 
that  all  having  any  ecclesiastical  benefice  should  do 
the  same,  and  declare  their  conformity  before  their 
congregation  ;  and  also  read  the  Articles  filoud.  It 
was  further  provided  that  all  incumbents  hereafter 
appointed  should  read  and  subscribe  the  Articles 
within  two  months  of  their  induction ;  that  all  ad- 
missions to  benefices  contrary  to  this  Act  should  be 
i'pso  facto  yo\^\  and  that  any  minister  teaching  any- 
thing opposed  to  the  Articles  should  be  liable  to  dep- 
rivation. It  was  further  enacted  that  no  one  should 
be  ordained  priest  before  the  age  of  twenty-four; 
and  none  deacon  until  he  had  subscribed  the 
Articles.  The  Queen  had  sent  a  message  to  the 
Commons,  requiring  them  not  to  deal  with  this  sub- 
ject ;  but  they  were  resolved  upon  it,  and  the  Act 
passed,  the  Queen  giving  her  assent.  May  29, 1571.  At 
the  same  time  the  Articles,  revised  by  Bishop  Jewel, 
were  laid  before  the  Convocation  in  Latin  and  in 
English,  and  both  were  subscribed  by  its  members. 
Several  further  attempts  were  made  in  the  direc- 


r 


814  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

tion  of  legislation  for  the  Church.  A  body  of 
canons  was  drawn  up  by  Convocation,  but  the  Queen 
refused  to  confirm  them.  Then  the  body  of  laws 
known  as  the  lieforrnatio  legum  eccleBiasticarum^  which 
had  been  drawn  ujd  in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  and 
Edward  VI.  very  nearly  passed.  The  failure  of  this 
measure  has  been  regarded  as  a  great  escape  for  the 
Church.  In  Parliament  also  some  further  attempts 
were  made  to  puritanize  the  Church ;  but  the  Queen 
would  yield  no  more.  She  would  have  no  bills  on 
religion  introduced  into  Parliament  until  they  had 
been  first  approved  by  Convocation ;  and  finally  she 
signified  her  utter  disapproval  of  them  before  the 
House ;  and  this  put  an  end  to  that  business. 

It  was  soon  after  this  (August  24, 1572),  that  there 
took  place  in  France  that  shocking  incident,  known 
as  the  massacre  of  St.  Bartholomew,  in  which,  by 
the  orders  of  Charles  IX.,  incited  by  his  mother, 
Catharine  de  Medici,  70,000  Huguenots,  including 
women  and  children,  were  murdered  in  cold  blood  in 
Paris  and  throughout  France.  The  number  above 
is  that  which  Sully  gives.  Others  make  the  number 
to  range  from  30,000  to  100,000.  Above  500  per- 
sons of  rank  and  10,000  of  lower  condition  perished 
in  Paris  alone.  Pope  Gregory  XIII.  ordered  a  "  Te 
Deum"  in  thanksgiving.  Philip  of  Spain  declared 
that  now  at  least  his  brothei'  of  France  deserved  his 
title  of  "Most  Christian  King."  Elizabeth  of  Eng- 
land ordered  her  Court  to  go  into  mourning,  and  re- 
fused to  see  the  French  Ambassador. 

Queen  Elizabeth,  however,  had  no  mind  to  encour- 
age or  to  tolerate  nonconformity  in  England,  and  she 


St,  Bartholomew.  816 


was  equally  resolved  to  throw  the  responsibility 
upon  the  bishops.  She  issued  a  proclamation,  Oc- 
tober 20,  1573,  in  which  she  says :  "  The  fault  is  in 
you,  to  whom  the  special  care  of  ecclesiastical  mat- 
ters doth  appertain,  and  who  have  your  visitations, 
episcopal  and  archidiaconal,  and  your  synods,  and 
such  other  meetings  of  the  clergy,  first  and  chiefly 
ordained  for  that  purpose  to  keep  all  churches  in 
your  diocese  in  one  uniform  and  godly  order,  and 
now  is,  as  is  commonly  said  (the  more's  the  pity),  to 
be  only  used  of  you  and  your  officers  to  get  money, 
or  for  some  other  purposes."  The  bishops  naturally 
were  little  satisfied  to  accept  such  a  rebuke.  Grin- 
dal,  of  London,  thought  it  very  unfair  to  make  such 
a  sweeping  condemnation,  as  though  all  were  alike, 
"whereas,"  he  says,  "there  is  not  like  occasion 
given  of  all."  Parkhurst,  of  Norwich,  who  was  him- 
self puritanically  minded,  and  had  been  one  of  the 
defaulters,  was  now  under  the  necessity  of  putting 
the  law  in  force,  which  he  did  reluctantly  and  no 
further  than  he  was  compelled.  "Less  than  this," 
h«  said  to  one  who  blamed  him,  "  I  cannot  do,  if  1 
\/  ill  avoid  extreme  danger."  In  this  diocese  of  Nor- 
wich it  is  said  that  no  fewer  than  300  of  the  clergy 
were  suspended,  so  that  Bishop  Parkhurst  must  have 
done  his  work  with  reasonable  stringency. 

The  Puritan  movement  now  began  gradually  to 
assume  more  definite  forms.  Whilst  men  like  Jewel, 
Sandys,  and  Grindal  accepted,  with  more  or  less 
satisfaction,  the  rules  of  the  Church,  and  remained 
in  her  communion,  and  others  remained  simply  in 
the  hope  of  affecting  changes,  another  class,  finding 


316  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

that  the  efforts  made  in  the  Parliament  to  puritan- 
ize  the  Church  came  to  nothing,  began  to  set  up  their 
own  theory  of  Church  doctrine  and  government  as  a 
system  opposed  to  tliat  whicli  was  now  in  possession. 
This  was  done  in  two  addresses  to  Parliament,  en- 
titled the  "  First  and  Second  Admonition,"  written 
by  a  number  of  the  Puritan  divines  under  the  direc- 
tion of  Thomas  Cartwright,  a  learned  Cambridge 
divine,  who  was  destined  to  be  a  leading  man  in  tliat 
party.  Cartwright  was  born  about  the  year  1535, 
was  educated  at  Cambridge,  resided  for  a  time  at 
Geneva,  where  he  became  intimate  with  Beza,  and 
returned  to  England  about  the  beginning  of  1570, 
when  he  was  made  Lady  Margaret  Professor  of  Di- 
vinity at  Cambridge.  As  fellow  of  Trinity  College, 
in  venting  his  Presbyterian  views,  he  came  into  col- 
lision with  Whitgift,  the  Master  of  Trinity,  who  was 
also  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity.  Refusing  to  give 
up  his  Puritan  notions  he  was  deprived  by  Whitgift, 
as  vice-chancellor,  first  of  his  professorship  and  then 
of  his  fellowship  (1571). 

For  a  time  Cartwright  remained  in  Church  com- 
munion ;  but,  when  the  ecclesiastical  changes  pro- 
posed in  Parliament  failed,  and  subscription  to  the 
Articles  was  made  compulsory,  and  other  measures 
of  a  similar  character  were  taken,  then  the  admoni- 
tions to  Parliament  appeared,  condemning  the  exist- 
ing state  of  things  in  the  Church,  and  praying  Par- 
liament for  a  discipline  more  consonant  to  the  Word 
of  God  and  the  other  Reformed  Churches.  The 
authors.  Field  and  Wilcox,  were  sent  to  Newgate, 
October  12,  1672;   and   Cartwright  produced   the 


The  Puritans.  317 


Second  Admonition,  and  was  answered  by  Whitgift. 
Tliese  controversial  works  are  of  considerable  im- 
portance, as  setting  forth  the  different  points  of  view 
of  the  Puritan  party  and  the  Church  in  regard  to 
doctrine  and  discipline.  Cartwright  contended  for 
the  Bible  and  the  Bible  only,  as  the  rule  of  faith  and 
discipline.  Whitgift,  in  this  partially  anticipating 
the  more  famous  work  of  Hooker,  maintained  that 
the  Bible  was  the  standard  of  faith,  but  not  of  disci- 
pline. Then  came,  in  1673,  the  organization  of  the 
first  Presbytery  in  England.  In  1576  Cartwright  pub- 
lished his  second  reply  to  Whitgift,  and  in  1677,  after 
his  flight  from  England,  he  supplemented  this  reply. 
But  before  this  the  good  Archbishop  had  passed  to 
his  rest,  dying  May  17,  1676,  being  nearly  seventy- 
one  years  of  age.  He  had  borne  with  great  resolu- 
tion and  patience  the  heavy  burden  of  duties  laid 
upon  him  by  his  high  office  and  the  many  difficulties 
arising  from  his  peculiar  circumstances.  One  thought 
lay  very  near  to  his  heart,  the  necessities  of  the 
Church  and  the  poverty-stricken  condition  of  the 
Clergy,  arising,  in  part,  from  the  way  in  which  the 
revenues  of  the  Church  had  been  appropriated  by 
the  favorites  of  the  Court  and  the  Queen  herself. 
In  this  respect  Elizabeth  contrasts  very  unfavorably 
with  her  sister  Mary.  Parker  wrote  to  the  Queen, 
from  his  deathbed,  in  very  energetic  terms,  rebuk- 
ing her  for  her  own  share  in  this  business,  and  for 
her  allowing  others  to  do  the  same.  It  is  said  that 
he  mentioned  Burleigh  (Cecil)  and  Bacon  by  name, 
and  that  they  prevented  the  letter  from  coming  into 
the  Queen's  hands. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

GRINDAL  AND    THE  PROPHESYINGS. 

HE  successor  of  Parker  in  the  Archbishop- 
ric of  Canterbury  was  Grindal,  Arch- 
bishop of  York,  and  formerly  Bishop  of 
^  London.  It  cannot  be  said  that  he  was  a 
man  eminently  fitted  for  the  post :  he  certainly  was 
not  a  man  of  the  same  school  as  Parker,  or  with  the 
same  ability  and  decision  of  character.  But  he  had 
administered  his  former  diocese  with  more  than 
average  success,  he  was  regarded  as  a  man  of  an 
amiable  disposition  ;  and  on  one  occasion  at  least,  he 
showed  that  he  was  not  lacking  in  principle  nor  un- 
willing to  suffer  for  its  maintenance,:.  It  would  ap- 
pear that  he  obeyed  the  call  to  Canterbury  with 
some  reluctance  and  with  a  consciousness  of  the 
difficulties  before  him. 

The  Puritans  had,  in  fact,  become  more  and  more 
unmanageable.  •*  They  are  laboring,"  says  Bishop 
Cox  in  1573,  "  to  bring  about  a  revolution  in  our 
Church;"  and  Grindal  gives  an  account  of  their 
policy  which  can  be  verified  from  what  we  know  of 
their  writings  and  opinions.  "  Our  affairs,  after  the 
settlement  of  the  question  respecting  ceremonies,"  he 
says, "  were  for  some  time  very  quiet,  when  some  viru- 
lent pamphlets  came  forth  in  which  almost  the  whole 
external  policy  of  the  Church  was  attacked.  They 
maintain  that  archbishops  and  bishops  should  alto- 

318 


Difficulties  of  Orindal.  319 

gether  be  reduced  to  the  ranks ;  that  the  ministers 
of  the  Church  ought  to  be  elected  solely  by  the 
people,  that  in  every  city,  town,  parish,  or  village,  a 
consistory  should  be  established,  consisting  of  the 
minister  and  elders  of  the  place,  who  alone  are  to 
decide  on  all  ecclesiastical  affairs." 

And  here,  unfortunately,  the  rapacious  courtier 
was  only  too  willing  to  make  a  tool  of  the  Puritan 
for  his  own  ends  j  and  there  was  always  the  fear  that 
the  Queen  would  allow  Leicester  to  have  his  way, 
especially  as  she  had  no  scruples  of  appropriating 
Church  revenues  to  the  crown  by  keeping  bishop- 
rics vacant,  sometimes  for  many  months. 

The  Parliament  which  met  in  February,  1576, 
brought  before  the  Queen  a  petition  for  the  reforma- 
tion of  discipline  in  the  Church.  The  Queen,  who 
had  actually  disallowed  canons  drawn  up  by  Convo- 
cation in  1572  for  that  purpose,  as  usual,  threw  the 
blame  of  all  disorders  upon  the  bishops.  Grindal, 
however,  renewed  the  effort  of  Parker  by  laying 
before  Convocation  a  set  of  fifteen  articles  "touch- 
ing the  admission  of  apt  and  fit  persons  to  the  min- 
istry, and  the  establishing  of  good  order  in  the 
Church."  Some  of  these  articles  which  were  prob- 
ably intended  to  conciliate  the  Puritans,  were  struck 
out  by  the  Queen.  One  of  these  allowed  marriages 
to  be  celebrated  all  the  year  through,  and  another 
forbade  the  administration  of  baptism  except  by  a 
lawful  minister.  These  articles  are  not  only  the 
first  disciplinary  regulations  in  the  Church  of 
England  after  the  Reformation  ;  but  they  are  the 
foundation  of  much  subsequent  legislation. 


320  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

During  Parker's  time  the  complaints  had  been 
frequent  as  to  the  paucity  of  preachers ;  but  things 
seem  now  to  have  greatly  improved.  Grindal  says 
that  where  there  were  only  three  or  four  before, 
there  are  now  forty  or  fifty,  which  shows  very  con- 
siderable progress.  Still  there  was,  especially  in 
some  localities,  a  great  dearth  of  Christian  teach- 
ing. In  order  to  supply  this  want  there  sprang  up 
a  peculiar  kind  of  institution  known  as  "  Prophesy- 
ings,"  being  something  partaking  of  the  character  of 
a  Church  congress  and  a  prayer  meeting,  sometimes 
made  up  of  the  Clergy  alone,  sometimes  of  Clergy 
and  laity  united. 

We  can  easily  understand  the  benefits  and  the 
disadvantages  of  gatherings  of  this  kind.  On  the 
one  hand,  at  a  time  when  education  was  little  dif- 
fused and  religious  instruction  could  sometimes  bo 
had  with  difiSculty,  if  at  all,  much  gain  might  re- 
sult from  such  conferences.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  was  the  danger  not  merely  of  merging  the  dis- 
tinctively ministerial  character  altogether,  but  of  en- 
couraging ill-considered,  uneducated,  and  mischiev- 
ous utterances  which  would  work  evil  to  those  tak- 
ing part  in  these  meetings  and  to  the  Church  at 
large. 

It  was  quite  natural  that  Queen  Elizabeth  should 
be  more  impressed  with  the  evils  of  disorder  than  by 
the  advantages  of  the  diffusion  of  religious  knowl- 
edge, and  accordingly  she  directed  Archbishop 
Parker  to  give  orders  to  Bishop  Parkhurst  to  "re- 
press immediately  these  vain  prophesyings."  Some 
of  the  Puritan  Privy  Councillors  having  encouraged 


Prophesyings  Forhiddeiu  821 

him  to  resume  tbem,  he  applied  to  Parker  for  guid- 
ance, and  was  peremptorily  ordered  in  tlie  Queen's 
name  to  put  a  stop  to  them.  Parkhurst  immediately 
obeyed. 

Some  time  afterwards  Grindal,  thinking  that  prob- 
ably it  was  only  the  abuse  of  the  propliesyings  that 
was  objected  to,  issued  a  set  of  directions  as  to 
the  proper  management  of  them.  Elizabeth  rebuked 
him  for  what  he  had  done,  and  declared  that  she 
would  have  no  more  of  these  prophesyings.  Ap- 
parently the  Archbishop  received  the  command  to 
stop  them  without  answering.  But  when  he  thought 
the  matter  over,  he  saw  that  he  could  not  conscien- 
tiously do  as  he  had  been  ordered.  The  Queen  had 
also  discouraged  the  multiplying  of  preachers;  and 
here  again  he  could  not  honestly  fall  in  with  her 
views.  Grindal,  accordingly,  wrote  to  the  Queen, 
remonstrating  with  her  on  her  intrusion  into  the 
sphere  of  the  bishopSj  and  pointing  out  that  he  could 
not  conscientiously  obey  her  command.  "I  cannot, 
with  safe  conscience,"  he  says,  "and  without  the  of- 
fence of  the  majesty  of  God,  give  my  consent  to  the 
suppressing  of  these  exercises.  I  choose  rather  to 
offend  your  earthly  Majesty  than  the  heavenly  maj- 
esty of  God."  In  conclusion  he  reminded  her  Maj- 
esty that,  although  she  was  a  mighty  Prince,  yet  there 
was  a  mightier  to  whom  they  both  must  answer. 

The  Queen,  enraged  at  his  resistance,  called  a 
meeting  of  the  Court  of  Star  Chamber,  and  pro- 
posed that  the  Archbishop  should  be  deprived ;  but 
was  persuaded  to  be  content  with  his  suspension  and 
confinement  to  his  palace  until  he  should  submit. 
U 


''•^r" 


322  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

We  shall  see  that,  subsequently,  this  policy  was 
not  consistently  pursued ;  but  for  the  present  the 
Qneen  was  determined  to  have  her  own  way.  She, 
accordingly,  ordered  a  letter  to  be  addressed  to  all 
the  bishops,  directing  them  at  once  to  see  that  these 
exercises  were  suppressed ;  and  as  none  of  them 
wished  to  share  the  fate  of  the  Archbishop,  her 
Majesty  was  obeyed.  Some  did  so  quite  readily  and 
cheerfully,  some  apparently  not  unwilling  to  have  a 
fling  at  the  Archbishop ;  but  others  reluctantly  and 
sadly.  Thus  Cox,  of  Ely,  wrote  to  Burleigh,  ex- 
pressing a  hope  that  her  Majesty  might  further  con- 
sider the  matter,  and  especially  how  great  need  there 
was  for  religious  instruction,  considering  the  igno- 
rance, idleness,  and  lewdness  of  many  of  the  Clergy. 

The  Archbishop  was  not  moved;  and  after  a  year, 
during  which  efforts  had  been  vainly  made  to  induce 
him  to  give  in,  the  Queen  again  asked  the  Star 
Chamber  to  deprive  him ;  but  was  induced  to  con- 
sent merely  to  a  renewal  of  his  suspension.  This, 
however,  did  not  stop  the  whole  of  his  work  as 
bishop.  Although  in  those  circumstances  he  could 
not  preside  over  the  Convocation,  he  yet  was  able  to 
hold  his  visitations,  to  consecrate,  and  to  ordain. 

When  the  Convocation  met,  they  entreated  the 
Queen  to  restore  their  president,  an  appeal  to  which 
her  Majesty  paid  no  attention.  She  was  pleased, 
however,  to  give  permission  to  Convocation  to  con- 
sider the  best  way  of  removing  certain  abuses  in  the 
Church.  One  of  the  grievances  complained  of  was 
the  frequent  infliction  of  the  penalty  of  excommuni- 
cation by  lay  judges,  and  for  the  most  frivolous 


Orindal  Restored.  823 

reasons.  The  Upper  House  concluded  that  such  a 
sentence  should  be  inflicted  only  by  the  bisliop  in 
his  court.  But  the  Lower  House  dissented,  ap- 
parently because  many  members  would  thereby  lose 
power  and  perhaps  fees.  Through  this  disagreement 
hardly  anything  was  accomplished  by  this  Convoca- 
tion. 

At  last,  after  about  five  years'  suspension,  the 
Archbishop  was  induced  to  make  a  qualified  submis- 
sion to  the  Queen,  admitting  that  some  of  the  bishops, 
by  whom  she  had  been  informed,  might  have  found 
those  exercises  injurious,  saying  also  that  he  did  not 
doubt  her  Majesty  meant  well  by  the  order  she  had 
given,  that  he  was  himself  sorry  that  he  liad  vexed 
her,  and  that  he  was  only  troubled  at  being  made 
the  instrument  of  putting  down  things  which  might 
be  useful.  However,  in  his  own  diocese  he  had 
stopped  them.     The  suspension  was  then  taken  off. 

As  already  hinted,  her  Majesty's  councillors  were 
not,  in  this  matter,  remarkable  for  their  consistency. 
Two  or  three  years  after  the  Archbishop's  submis- 
sion, in  the  year  1585,  the  Bishop  of  Chester,  writ- 
ing to  his  clergy,  set  forth  that  "  the  Lords  of  her 
Majesty's  most  honorable  Privy  Council,"  after  due 
consideration  of  the  interests  of  religion,  had  "recom- 
mended some  further  enlargements  of  the  ecclesias- 
tical exercises  to  the  end  they  might  be  more  fre- 
quently used ; "  and  in  fact,  they  are  no ..  to  be 
encouraged,  instead  of  being  put  down,  since  "much 
good  hath  ensued  of  this  exercise." 

But  by  this  time  the  Archbishop  had  passed  be- 
yond the  reach  of  human  censure  or  approval.     He 


•f 


b24  Tht  Anylican  Reformation. 

had  become  old  and  blind  and  unfit  for  the  dischnige 
of  his  episcopal  duties:  it  was  therefore  suggested  to 
him  that  he  should  resign,  whicli  lie  prepared  to  do 
with  some  apparent  unwillingness.  But  before  the 
details  were  settled  he  died,  July  6,  1583,  about 
seventy  yt  rs  of  age.  If  Grindal  cannot  be  placed 
among  the  great  bishops  of  the  Church,  and  if  he 
was  not  quite  equal  to  the  difficult  circumstances  of 
his  position,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  he  was  a  sin- 
cere, devout,  conscientious  Christian,  and  one  who 
was  ready  to  suffer  at  the  call  of  duty. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

"WHITGIFT  AND  PURITANISM. 

[HEN  hearing  of  Cartwright's  doings  at 
Cambridge,  we  learned  that  he  was  disci- 
plined b}-^  a  vigorous  Master  of  Trinity 
College  named  Whitgift,  a  native  of  Lin- 
colnshire, born  at  Grimsby,  in  1630.  At  the  death 
of  Griiidal  he  was  about  fifty-three  and  he  had  be- 
come Bishop  of  Worcester  in  1577.  While  Dean  of 
Lincoln,  he  had  been  made  Prolocutoi*  of  the  Convo- 
cation of  Canterbury  in  1572,  and  had  been  ap- 
pointed by  Parker  to  answer  Cartwright.  Here  was 
a  man  recognized  as  scholar,  administrator,  disciplin- 
arian, in  a  high  degree  qualified  for  high  office,  and 
the  choice  of  the  sage  Queen  fell  upon  him  for  the 
Archbishopric  of  Canterbury. 

Prominent  at  this  time  among  the  Puritans  were  the 
Separatists  who  were  beginning  to  fall  apart  among 
themselves,  and  develop  new  forms  of  dissidence. 
The  first  of  the  Separatists  were  those  who  es- 
poused the  Presbj^terian  form  of  government,  and  set 
up  their  first  Presbytery  in  London  in  1573.  But 
now  another  sect  arose  called  the  Brownists,  who 
may  be  said  to  be  the  ancestors  of  the  modern  Inde- 
pendents or  Congregationalists.  The  founder  of  this 
sect  was  Robert  Brown,  a  clergyman  in  Norfolk ;  and 
for  a  time  chaplain  to  the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  through 
whose  influence   probably   it   was  that  he  escaped 

326 


326  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

deprivation  for  a  time.  After  being  a  schoolmaster, 
he  became  a  lecturer  and  itinerant  preacher,  and  in 
this  capacity  went  about  inveighing  against  the 
Church  and  the  bishops.  In  1581  he  was  committed 
by  the  Bishop  of  Norwich  to  the  custody  of  the 
Sheriff,  but  was  very  soon  released,  and  in  1582  ho 
published  a  book  on  the  "  Life  and  ]'Janners  of  all 
True  Christians,"  with  a  preface  on  "  Reformation 
without  tarrying  for  any."  In  this  book  he  set  forth 
the  iniquity  of  those  who  could  acquiesce  in  the 
present  church  system  and  the  still  greater  depravity 
of  those  who  remained  in  a  church  the  laws  and  ob- 
servances of  which  they  did  not  approve.  Upon  this 
he  was  again  put  in  prison  but  released  at  the  inter- 
cession of  Lord  Burleigh  ;  and  this  happened  a  good 
many  times.  In  fact,  Brown  boasted  that  he  had 
seen  the  inside  of  thirty-two  prisons.  At  length  he 
fled  to  Holland  with  a  number  of  like-minded  people, 
and  set  up  a  congregation  at  Middelburg.  But  con- 
tentions broke  out  among  them ;  and  Brown  got 
"weary  of  his  office,"  and  in  1589  returned  to  Eng- 
land, conformed,  and  became  incumbent  of  a  parish 
in  Northamptonshire.  The  principle  of  the  denomi- 
nation of  which  Brown  may  be  called  the  founder 
was  the  independence  of  each  congregation  in  regard 
both  to  doctrine  and  discipline;  and  although  the 
congregations  generally  adopted  the  Presbyterian 
confessions,  and  in  later  times  formed  a  union  of 
clmrches,  this  was  no  part  of  their  system,  and  was 
f.  virtual  surrender  of  their  principles. 

The  secession  of  Brown  did  not  lead  to  the  sup- 
pression of  the  sect,  and  another  leader  was  found, 


The  Brownists,  327 


naDied  Barrow,  from  whom  they  got  the  name  of  Bur- 
rowists,  as  they  had  got  that  of  Brownists  from  their 
first  founder.  They  became  very  numerous  in  Eng- 
land, as  we  shall  see  more  particularly  when  we  come 
to  the  commonwealth  period,  and  were  very  bitter 
and  outspoken  against  the  Church,  especially  against 
those  of  the  Puritan  teachers  who  remained  in  her 
communion.  In  1583,  two  of  them  were  put  to 
death,  and  in  1593  three  more,  Barrow  being  one  of 
the  three.  More  of  this  denomination  perished  after 
1593,  when  they  emigrated  to  Holland.  From  thence 
in  1620  a  number  of  them  sailed  in  the  Mayflower 
for  the  American  continent:  they  have  been  known 
in  history  as  the  "  Pilgrim  Fathers." 

The  Presbyterians  and  the  Independents  may  be 
called  the  legitimate  offspring  of  English  Puritanism. 
This  can  hardly  be  said  of  the  sect  of  Anabaptists, 
or  rather  of  the  sects  which  were  so  designated,  for 
among  them  there  was  a  considerable  variety  of  opin- 
ions. One  class,  which  at  first  was  not  very  promi- 
nent, differed  from  the  Independents  only  iu  reject- 
ing Infant  Baptism  and  perhaps  in  holding  to  a  more 
rigid  Calvinism.  They  are  represented  by  the  large 
and  influential  denomination  now  known  as  Baptists, 
although  these  have  now,  to  a  great  extent,  given  up 
the  Calvinism  of  their  forefathers. 

Of  the  other  Anabaptists  there  were  several  divi- 
sions. One  sect  was  known  as  the  "  Family  of  Love  " 
and  derived  its  principles  from  Henry  Nicholas,  of 
Amsterdam.  Thev  held  mystical  and  quietist  opin- 
ions, allegorizing  and  spiritualizing  the  historical 
facts    recorded    in    Scripture.      Living,    as    they 


828  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

thought,  in  a  sphere  above  the  contentions  of  di- 
cordant  sects,  they  hud  a  great  antipathy  to  tijo 
Puritans  with  whom  they  were  in  danger  of  being 
confounded.  They  did  not  persist  as  a  sect;  but 
some  of  their  tendencies  came  out  in  the  Quakers  of 
a  later  time. 

But  the  Anabaptists  who  were  the  most  trouble- 
some and  the  most  dangerous  are  those  who  were 
commonly  known  by  that  name  in  Germany,  not 
long  after  the  outbreak  of  the  Reformation.  They 
were  enthusiasts  who  held  communistic  principles, 
denying  tlie  authority  of  the  State  and  the  laws,  the 
right  to  hold  property,  and  the  obligation  of  an  oath. 
In  Germany  they  had  become  a  serious  danger  to  the 
peace  of  the  Empire  and  had  stirred  up  civil  war. 
In  England  they  seem  to  have  been  contented  with 
propagating  their  opinions  without  giving  practical 
efifect  to  them.  Yet  this  had  not  prevented  them 
from  being  persecuted.  Many  of  them  suffered  dealh 
under  Henry  VIII.  A  considerable  proportion  of 
those  who  suffered  under  Mary  were  Anabaptists. 
One  suffered  under  Edward  VI.  Under  Elizabeth 
eleven  of  them  were  sentenced  to  be  burnt,  and  two 
actually  suffered  death  in  this  way  (July  22,  1575) ; 
but  the  horror  of  the  people  showed  that  the  days  of 
burning  had  gone  by. 

But  there  was  another  party,  to  which  frequent 
reference  has  been  made,  namely  that  of  the  Puritans 
who  remained  in  the  communion  and  even  in  the 
ministry  of  the  Church,  with  the  deliberate  intention 
of  revolutionizing  the  whole  system  of  service  and 
discipline.     These  men  had  adopted  as  their  stand- 


Puritans  in  the  Church.  329 

ard,  the  "Book  of  Discipline,"  drawn  up  on  the  Swiss 
model  by  Cartwright  and  Tiavers,  and  resolved  to 
stand  by  it,  whilst  they  were  supported  in  this  en- 
deavor by  the  mass  of  the  Separatists.  They  even 
went  so  far  as  to  insist  that  men  episcopally  ordained 
were  not  valid  ministers,  and  they  established  a  sort 
of  presbytery,  in  various  parts,  called  a  Classing  by 
which  real  ordination  was  to  be  conferred.  This 
classis  was  also  to  decide  what  measure  of  ritual 
might  be  used  by  those  belonging  to  their  associa- 
tion. It  was,  in  fact,  a  deliberate  attempt  to  set 
aside  the  actual  system  of  the  Church,  or  to  concede  to 
it  only  a  kind  of  legal  right;  whilst  all  the  spiritual 
power  and  authority  was  to  be  vested  in  the  pres- 
byteries. 

In  Whitgift,  however,  they  met  a  man  who  was 
quite  as  resolute  in  giving  effect  to  his  own  and  the 
Church's  theory  of  discipline,  as  they  were  to  im- 
prove that  which  they  had  now  chosen.  He  was 
confirmed  September,  1583,  and  immediately  after- 
wards issued  a  body  of  articles,  prepared  after  con- 
sultation with  the  other  bishops,  requiring  the  clergy 
to  subscribe  three  special  articles  on  pain  of  depriva- 
tion: 1.  The  Royal  Supremacy;  2.  The  Book  of 
Common  Prayer;  and  3.  The  Articles  of  Religion  of 
1563.  These  articles  were  not  new ;  but  they  had 
never  been  generally  enforced  ;  and  their  contents 
were  ostentatiously  set  at  naught  by  some  of  the 
Puritan  preachers.  The  articles  were  sent  to  the 
bishops  October  19,  and  these  were  required  to  re- 
turn the  names  of  all  the  clergy  in  the  diocese,  and  to 
say  whether  they  conformed  to  the  articles  now  sent 


i'iyr-  •  ',■ 


330  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

forth.  The  Archbishop  knew  well  that  such  a  de- 
mand would  stir  up  a  strenuous  opposition;  but  he 
was  quite  prepared  for  it. 

A  new  Ecclesiastical  Commission  was  appointed, 
entrusted  with  the  duty  of  giving  effect  to  the  Arch- 
bishop's policy,  the  Queen  becoming  at  last  aware 
of  the  necessity  of  giving  the  bishops  a  more  power- 
ful support.  Some  of  the  recusants  brought  a  com- 
plaint  before  the  Privy  Council  who,  on  their  part, 
summoned  the  Archbishop  to  appear  before  them. 
But  Whitgift  was  too  sure  of  his  position  to  be  in- 
timidated. He  told  the  Council  that  they  were  ex- 
ceeding their  rights,  and  that  the  Puritans  whose 
cause  they  were  espousing  were  really  playing  into 
the  hands  of  the  Papists.  The  Coancil,  by  their 
interference,  were  only  rendering  it  impossible  for 
him  to  perform  the  duty  which  her  Majesty  looked 
for  at  his  hands.  The  Council,  knowing  tliat  they 
would  have  the  Queen  to  deal  with  as  well  as  the 
Archbishop,  ceased  to  protest. 

But  there  were  other  ways  of  annoying  the 
Primate,  and  the  Council  thought  to  do  so  by  draw- 
ing up  a  set  of  inquiries,  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
the  bishops  had  done  their  duties,  really  intending  to 
suggest  that  the  troubles  of  the  Church  were  the  re- 
sult of  their  neglect  of  duty.  Instead  of  being  ag- 
grieved at  this,  the  Archbishop  readily  forwarded  the 
Articles  to  the  bishops,  glad  to  have  opportunity  of 
stimulating  his  colleagues  to  do  their  work.  Another 
measure  he  took,  which  in  ordinary  circumstances 
could  hardly  be  justified,  and  which  brought  liim 
into  considerable  trouble,  namely  the  drawing  up  of 


•;•  ■-«,< -^■' 


Whitgift  and  the  Council.  331 

a  set  of  twenty-four  articles,  which  were  to  be  ap- 
plied to  any  one  suspected  of  nonconformity,  from 
which  he  was  to  be  required  to  purge  himself  on 
oatli.  The  clerk  of  the  Council,  by  name  Beale,  a 
somewhat  pronounced  Puritan,  who  was  always 
ready  to  annoy  the  Archbishop,  made  an  insolent  at- 
tack upon  him  on  this  occasion.  It  is  said  that  the 
Earl  of  Leicester  went  so  far  as  to  plot  against  his 
life.  But  still  more  grievous  was  the  disapproval  of 
Lord  Burleigh,  who  said,  he  found  the  Articles 
*^  so  curiously  penned,  that  I  think  the  Inquisition 
in  Spain  use  not  so  many  questions  to  comprehend 
and  to  trap  their  prey.  According  to  my  simple 
judgment  this  kind  of  proceeding  is  too  much  savor- 
ing of  the  Roman  Inquisition,  and  is  rather  a  device 
to  seek  for  ofifenders  than  to  reform  any."  Whit- 
gift replied  that  he  had  only  followed  the  methods  of 
some  other  courts,  and  that  he  had  done  nothing 
which  he  did  not  regard  as  of  absolute  necessity. 
Moreover  he  pointed  out — and  here  is  the  best  de- 
fence of  his  measure — that  the  people  at  whom  these 
Articles  were  aimed  worked  in  secret,  so  that  wit- 
nesses could  hardly  be  procured.  In  fact,  it  cannot 
be  denied  tliat  the  methods  of  some  of  the  Puritans 
justified  the  adoption  of  exceptional  measures. 

The  real  trouble  in  this  matter  was  that  most  of 
the  Privy  Councillors  who  supported  the  Puritan 
side  were  simply  endeavoring  to  throw  discredit  upon 
the  bishops,  and  they  were  not  at  all  scrupulous 
as  to  the  means  which  they  adopted  for  that  purpose. 
As  for  the  Queen,  whilst  she  sustained  Whitgift  in 
his  endeavors  to  maintain  discipline,  she  vexed  him 


882  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

by  her  resolute  and  persevering  depredations  on  the 
revenues  of  the  Church.  At  one  time  there  were 
no  fewer  than  five  sees  vacant,  the  revenues  all  com- 
ing to  the  Queen. 

About  this  time  Whitgift  had  another  dispute 
with  Lord  Burleigh,  which  has  considerable  interest 
for  more  reasons  than  one.  The  mastership  of  the 
Temple  having  become  vacant,  Burleigh  wished  the 
post  to  be  bestowed  upon  Walter  Travers,  his  chap- 
lain and  reader  at  the  Temple.  But  Travers  was 
not  only  without  episcopal  orders,  having  been 
merely  called  by  a  congregation  at  Antwerp,  and  or- 
dained by  a  presbytery,  but  he  was  joint  author  with 
Cartwright  of  the  "  Book  of  Discipline." 

It  would  have  been  impossible  for  Whitgift  to 
sanction  the  appointment  of  such  a  man  without  in- 
curring the  charge  of  absolute  inconsistency.  He 
therefore  wrote  to  the  Queen,  telling  her  what  the 
principles  of  Travers  were,  and  recommending  one 
of  her  chaplains.  Dr.  Bond,  for  the  place.  As  a  con- 
sequence, Burleigh  withdrew  his  candidate,  but  on 
the  condition  that  the  Archbishop  should  do  the 
same.  The  man  chosen  as  master  of  the  Temple 
was  one  whose  name  will  live  with  the  English 
Church  and  the  English  language,  Richard  Hooker. 

At  this  time  the  balance  hung  so  even  between 
the  two  parties  that  it  might  seem  rash  to  predict 
whether  Anglicanism  or  Puritanism  should  obtain 
the  upper  hand  in  England.  It  was  the  fixed  resolve 
of  the  Puritans  to  get  rid  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  to  put  in  its  place  the  "  Directory  of 
Public   Worship,"  and  also  to   destroy  the   whole 


Whitgift  and  the  Council.  333 

episcopal  constitution  of  the  Church.  A  consider- 
able proportion  of  the  English  people  were  in  favor 
of  these  changes.  Several  members  of  the  Privy 
Council  were,  for  different  reasons,  ready  to  assist  in 
bringing  them  about.  It  is  owing  to  Queen  Eliza- 
beth and  Archbishop  Whitgift,  under  God,  that  these 
dangers  were  averted.  Whatever  our  judgment  may 
be  of  the  virtues  or  the  faults  of  this  great  Queen, 
she  had  not  followed  in  the  footsteps  of  her  brother 
and  sister,  and  so  produced  a  reaction  against  the  sys- 
tem which  she  upheld,  nor  had  she  left  to  her  suc- 
cessors an  encouragement  to  take  the  course  which 
proved  so  fatal.  Elizabeth  left  the  Church  of  Eng- 
hind  stronger,  and  more  fully  established  in  its  own 
special  principles  than  she  found  it. 

But  the  House  of  Commons  was  long  under  Puri- 
tan influence.  A  Bill  was  brought  in  for  the  "  Re- 
formation of  the  Church"  intended  to  introduce 
clianges  in  a  Puritan  direction.  Only  the  assurance 
that  the  Queen  would  quash  it  led  to  its  withdrawal. 
Even  then  the  Lower  House  adopted  a  petition  to  the 
House  of  Lords  embodying  the  principal  points  in 
the  Bill.  These  were  very  sweeping,  and  recom- 
mended, that  priests  should  be  put  on  a  level  with 
bishops  in  regard  to  the  power  of  ordination,  that  no 
ordination  should  take  place  without  a  call  from  a 
congregation,  that  subscriptions  should  be  done 
away  with,  prophesyings  restored,  and  all  dispensa- 
tions abolished. 

What  the  real  opinion  of  the  House  of  Lords  may 
have  been,  it  is  not  quite  easy  to  say.  There  was  no 
doubt,  however,  of  the  opinion  of  the  Queen ;  and 


834  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

the  petition  was  rejected.  The  Arclibishop,  deter- 
mined to  place  the  discipline  of  the  Church  on  a 
firmer  basis,  took  the  opportunity  of  drawing  up  a 
body  of  canons  in  Convocation,  which  he  phiced  in 
the  hands  of  the  Queen,  so  that  when  the  petition 
from  the  Lower  House  was  brought  to  her,  she  was 
able  to  say  that  order  had  already  been  taken  upon 
many  points  raised  in  it.  These  canons  were  passed 
by  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury,  and  received  the 
royal  assent,  March  23,  1585.  Their  provisions  are 
of  considerable  importance,  and  some  of  them  may 
here  be  noted.  In  regard  to  ordination,  candidates 
were  required  to  have  a  title  in  the  diocese  in  which 
they  were  ordained,  to  be  of  full  age,  graduates,  or 
at  least  able  to  give  an  account  of  their  faith  in 
Latin.  Licences  for  marriages  were  not  to  be  given 
save  under  sufficient  bonds  that  there  is  consent  of 
parents  and  no  legal  impediment.  Excommunica- 
tions for  moral  offences  were  to  be  pronounced  by 
the  bishop  or  some  dignified  ecclesiastic ;  for  con- 
tumacy, by  the  official.  Pluralities  were  restricted, 
fees  were  regulated ;  and  inquiries  were  to  be  made 
annually  into  the  learning  and  morals  of  the  clergy. 
This  did  not  suit  the  Puritans  at  all ;  and  they  at- 
tempted to  bring  their  theories  into  Parliament. 
But  the  Queen  put  a  stop  to  these  attempts  by  dis- 
solving Parliament  with  some  plain  and  stern  words. 
Referring  to  the  Puritans  she  spoke  of  them  as 
"fault-finders"  and  said  there  was  no  institution 
with  which  fault  might  not  be  found.  At  the  same 
time  she  admonished  the  bishops,  hinting  that,  if 
they  did  not  amend,  she  was  minded  to  depose  them. 


WhityifCs   Work.  835 

And  then  she  brought  out  her  favorite  formula. 
She  would  not,  she  said,  show  favors  to  Romanists, 
but  neither  would  she  tolerate  new  fangledness. 
She  meant  to  guide  both  by  God's  good  rule. 

There  is  nothing  more  striking  in  all  these  con- 
troversies than  the  good  sense,  the  moderation,  and 
the  resolute  consistency  of  the  Archbishop.  Whether 
it  was  a  Puritan  who  wanted  to  revolutionize  the 
Church,  or  the  Queen  or  a  courtier  who  would 
plunder  her  possessions,  or  an  attempt  was  made  to 
set  aside  the  recognized  discipline  of  the  Church,  the 
Archbishop  was  ready  to  enter  his  protest.  Finding 
the  inconvenience  of  being  outside  the  Council  he 
succeeded  in  being  made  a  member  of  it  in  February, 
1586,  together  with  two  noblemen  upon  whom  he 
could  depend. 

In  the  next  Parliament,  meeting  October,  1586, 
the  Puritans,  not  dismayed  by  their  defeat  in  the 
previous  Parliament,  had  it  moved  (February  27, 
1587),  "  that  all  laws  then  in  force  touching  the  eccle- 
siastical settlement  might  be  repealed,  and  that  the 
Book  of  Discipline  might  be  adopted  as  the  legal 
settlement  of  Discipline  and  Public  Worship."  Per- 
mission was  refused  to  introduce  the  Bill;  and  the 
Queen,  on  being  made  aware  of  the  motion,  declared 
that  she  was  "  fully  satisfied  with  the  reformation 
that  had  taken  place,  and  minded  not  now  to  begin 
to  settle  herself  in  causes  of  religion,"  adding  that 
the  proposals  now  made  were  most  "  prejudicial  to 
the  religion  established,  to  her  crown,  her  govern- 
ment, and  her  subjects."  She  thought  it  not  well 
that  they  should  always  be  making  new  laws,  and, 


836  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

in  her  opinion,  the  Clergy  were  the  best  judges  in 
such  matters.  This  attempt  liaving  failed,  a  number 
of  the  Puritan  Clergy  united  and  subscribed  the  Book 
of  Discipline,  it  is  said,  to  the  number  of  five  hundred. 

As  is  common,  in  such  circumstances,  some  of 
tl'em  were  in  favor  of  immediate  action,  and  of  an 
endeavor  to  secure  a  reformation  *'  in  the  best  man- 
ner possible."  Others  favored  the  inculcation  of 
their  principles,  and  the  exercise  of  patience  until 
the  people  should  be  better  instructed  in  these  mat- 
ters. But  the  party  of  violence  could  not  be  re- 
strained; and  then  broke  out  a  controversy  which 
reflects,  perhaps,  greater  disgrace  upon  the  Puritan 
Party  than  any  other  incident  in  its  histor3^  Bear- 
ing in  mind  that  controv  rsialists  in  those  days  were 
not  very  choice  in  their  language,  and  making  all 
allowance  for  the  circumstances,  it  can  hardly  be 
denifed  that  the  Marprelate  Controversy  was  dis- 
graceful. 

The  first  of  the  tracts  issued  by  "  Martin  Marprel- 
ate " — a  designation  adopted  by  a  number  of  writers 
acting  in  concert — p.ppeared  in  1588.  It  was  an- 
swered not  very  powerfullj'^  by  Bishop  Cooper  who 
gives  his  impression  of  the  publication  in  the  follow- 
ing remarks :  "  The  author  calleth  himself  by  a 
feigned  name,  '  Martin  Marprelate  : '  a  very  fit  name 
undoubtedly.  But  if  this  outrngeous  spirit  of  bold- 
ness be  not  stopped  speedily,  I  fear  he  will  prove 
himself  to  be  not  only  Mar-prelate,  but  Mar-prince, 
Mar-state,  Mar-law,  Mar-magistrate,  and  all  together, 
until  he  bring  it  to  an  anabaptistical  equality  and 
connnunity." 


Martin  Marprelate,  837 

It  is  not  quite  easy  for  us,  in  these  days,  to  under- 
stand the  spirit  in  whicli  this  controversy  was  con- 
ducted. Heylin's  account  of  it  is  not  exnggerated. 
lie  says,  "they  could  find  no  other  title  for  the  Arch- 
bishop than  Beelzebub  of  Canterbury,  Pope  of  Lam- 
beth, the  Canterbury  Caiaphas,  Esau,  a  monstrous 
antichrist,  a  most  bloody  oppressor  of  God's  saints, 
a  very  antichristian  beast,  most  bloody  tyrant. 
The  bishops  are  described  as  unlawful,  unnatural, 
false,  and  bastardly  governors  of  the  Church,  the 
ordinances  of  the  devil,  petty  popes,  petty  anti- 
christs, incarnate  devils,  bishops  of  the  devil,  cogging 
cozening  knaves,  who  will  lie  like  dogs.  They  are 
proud,  papist,  profane,  presumptuous,  paltry,  pesti- 
lent, pernicious  prelates  and  usurpers,  enemies  of 
God  and  the  state.  The  clergy  are  popish  priests, 
or  monks,  or  friars,  ale-hunters,  or  boys  or  lads,  or 
drunkards,  and  dolts,  hogs,  dogs,  wolves,  foxes, 
eimoniacs,  usurpers,  proctors  of  antichrist,  popish 
chapmen,  bolting  neutrals,  greedy  dogs  to  fill  their 
paunches,  desperate  and  forlorn  atheists,  a  cursed 
uncircumcised  murdering  generation,  a  crew  of  bloody 
soul  murderers,  sacrilegious  Church-robbers,  and  fol- 
lowers of  antichrist."  The  Convocation  is  similarly 
characterized ;  and  the  Prayer  Book  is  pronounced 
to  be  "  a  book  full  of  corruption,  many  of  the  con- 
tents against  the  Word  of  God,  the  sacraments 
wickedly  mangled  and  profaned  therein  ;  the  Lord's 
Supper  not  eaten,  but  made  a  pageimt  and  a  stage- 
play  ;  the  form  of  public  baptism  full  of  childish  and 
superstitious  toys." 

Attempts  were  made  to  capture  the  authors  or 
V 


888  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

printers  of  these  libels ;  but  the  printing  press  was 
moved  about  from  place  to  place,  until  it  was  seized 
at  Manchester  while  printing  a  reply  to  Bishop 
Cooper,  under  the  title,  "Hay  any  work  for 
Cooper?"  The  layn-m  who  had  furnished  funds 
had  a  fine  imposed  upon  them,  which  they  were  not 
required  to  pay.  Penry,  the  worst  of  the  writers, 
for  the  time  managed  to  escape.  Udal,  convicted  of 
having  written  a  tract  entitled  the  "  Declaration," 
was  condemned  to  die  under  the  libel  law  of  1681. 
By  the  intercession  of  Whitgift  he  obtained  a  pardon, 
but  died  in  prison.  Penry,  whom  they  had  failed  to 
convict,  fled  to  Scotland;  but  continued  to  issue 
pamphlets  of  the  most  scurrilous  character  against 
the  bishops  and  the  Queen.  Returning  to  England, 
he  was  arrested  and  put  to  death. 

These  evidences  of  the  vitality  of  Puritanism  and 
of  its  unrelenting  hostility  to  the  established  order 
of  things  in  Church  and  State  decided  the  authorities 
to  strike  at  what  they  regarded  as  the  root  of  the 
evil.  Accordingly  Cartwright  was  summoned  before 
the  ecclesiastical  commissioners  and  required  to 
purge  himself  by  oath  from  various  violations  of  the 
law.  On  refusing  to  take  the  oath  he  was  committed 
to  the  Fleet,  together  with  a  nunjber  of  ministers 
who  had  made  a  similar  refusal.  After  being  de- 
tained for  a  short  time,  Cartwright,  on  the  inter- 
cession of  the  Archbishop,  was  set  at  liberty  ;  and,  in 
short,  the  difficulty  of  applying  this  law  was  soon 
made  manifest,  so  that  it  was  determined  to  take 
other  measures. 

This  was  taken   in   hand   in   the   Parliament  of 


Proceeding  against  the  Puritans.  839 

1693.  The  Queen's  epeech  informed  the  members 
that  they  had  been  summoned  in  order  to  ^'  compel 
by  some  sharp  means  to  a  more  due  obedience  tliose 
that  neglected  the  service  of  God.  The  Mari)relate 
Tracts  had  done  their  work  in  a  sense  very  different 
from  that  of  their  writers.  The  House  of  Commons 
of  the  earlier  period  had  been  ready  for  all  kinds  of 
Puritan  innovations ;  but  now,  when  it  was  proposed 
to  bring  in  a  bill  against  the  Church  courts  and  the 
oath,  the  Commons  enacted,  instead,  a  law,  providing 
**  tliat  if  any  person  or  persons  above  the  age  of  six- 
teen years  should  obstinately  refuse  to  repair  to  some 
church,  chapel,  or  usual  place  of  common  prayer  to 
hear  divine  service  established,  or  shall  forbear  to  do 
the  same  for  the  space  of  a  month  without  lawful 
cause,"  and  a  great  deal  more  to  the  same  effect, 
"that  then  every  person  so  offending  and  convicted 
of  it,  should  be  committed  unto  prison  without  bail 
or  mainprise  till  he  or  they  should  testify  their  con- 
formity by  coming  to  some  churcli,  chapel,  or  other 
place  of  common  prayer  to  hear  divine  service,  and 
to  make  open  submission  and  declaration  of  the 
same,  in  such  form  or  manner  as  by  the  said  statute 
was  provided."  In  case  of  the  submission  not  being 
made  within  three  months,  the  recusant  was  to  be 
banished,  and,  if  he  returned  without  leave,  he  was 
to  be  put  to  death. 

By  this  means  a  double  advantage  was  secured, 
the  odium  of  enforcing  discipline  was  pjirtly  removed 
from  the  ecclesiastical  authorities,  and  a  good  many 
of  the  disaffected  left  the  country,  reinforcing  those 
who  had  already  gone  abroad.    Some  did  not  wait  to 


34:0  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

be  expatriated,  but  petitioned  that  they  might  be 
allowed  to  emigrate  to  the  Western  Continent  wheio 
they  might  worship  God  according  to  their  con- 
sciences, and  do  her  Majesty  some  service  **  against 
the  persecuting  Spaniards."  Some  also,  who  had 
been  kept  in  prison,  in  the  hope  of  tlieir  being 
brought  to  submission,  were  now  allowed  to  go  free 
and  leave  the  country. 

The  Queen  and  the  bishops  could  hardly  believe 
that  they  had  at  last  secured  unanimity  in  religion, 
or  even  uniformity ;  but  they  had  made  considerable 
progress  in  that  direction.  Puritanism  still  existed 
and  had  by  no  means  relinquished  its  principles  or 
its  plans.  Romanism  bad  still  its  adherents,  al- 
though their  hopes  had  been  weaker  since  the  death 
of  Mary  Stuart  in  1588.  But  the  jieople  at  large 
were  contented  with  the  Church  as  it  was,  and  as 
the  Queen  and  Parker  and  Whitgift  had  made  it. 

A  bolder  work  on  behalf  of  episcopacy  was  struck  by 
Dr.  Bancroft  (afterwards  Bisliop  of  London  and  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury)  in  his  sermon  at  Paul's  Cross, 
February  9,  1589.  Instead  of  defending  episcopacy 
as  a  lawful  form  of  church  government,  he  contended 
that  there  was  no  ground  whatever,  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, for  Presbyterian  principles,  but  only  for 
episcopacy.  "  There  was  never,"  he  declared,  "  an- 
cient Father  since  the  Apostles'  time,  were  he  never 
so  learned  or  studious  of  the  truth,  there  was  never 
particular  church  council  or  synod,  or  any  man  of 
judgment  that  ever  lived  till  these  later  times,  that 
did  even  so  much  as  dream  of  such  a  meaning.  It  is 
most  manifest  that  there  bath  been  a  diverse  govern- 


The  Episcopate  and  the  Lord^s  Day.        341 

ment  from  this  [the  Presbyterian]  used  in  the 
Church  ever  since  the  Apostles'  time.  .  .  There  is  no 
man  living,  as  I  suppose,  able  to  show  where  there 
was  any  church  planted  ever  since  the  Apostles* 
time,  but  there  the  bishop  had  authority  over  the 
rest  of  the  ministry."  Other  writers  arose  on  the 
same  side,  chief  among  whom  was  Thomas  Bilson, 
afterwards  Bishop  of  Winchester,  author  of  a  book 
on  the  "  Perpetual  Government  of  Christ's  Church," 
published  in  1593. 

But  the  episcopate  was  not  the  only  question  in 
debate  between  the  Puritans  and  the  Churchmen. 
Two  years  after  the  publication  of  Bilson's  work 
there  appeared  a  book  setting  forth  those  views  of  the 
Lord's  Day  which  were  afterwards  known  as  Sab- 
batarian. It  had  not  been  customary,  up  to  this 
time,  to  base  the  obligation  of  the  Lord's  Day  upon 
the  Jewish  law ;  but  upon  custom,  utility,  and  the 
rule  of  the  Church.  Li  1595,  however,  a  book  ap- 
peared, written  by  a  Puritan  minister  named  Bound, 
in  which  he  declared  that  the  keeping  of  the  Sabbath 
Wfis  not  merely  a  positive  precept,  but  a  moral  law, 
since  in  the  very  nature  of  things  it  was  necessary  to 
rest  every  seventh  day  ;  and  that  the  Christian  rest 
should  be  of  the  same  kind  as  that  required  of  the 
Jews.  It  should  be  a  day  of  rest  and  abstention 
from  all  labor,  and  a  day  of  worship ;  not  a  day  of 
recreation  and  amusement.  There  was  a  double  rea- 
son for  the  course  now  taken.  They  wanted  to  put 
a  stop  to  the  sports ;  and  they  were  resolved  to  assign 
to  the  festivals  of  the  Church  a  distinctly  lower  place 
than  that  which  was  claimed  for  the  Lord's  day. 


842  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

When  we  consider  how  strong  is  the  influence  of 
asceticism  over  religious  minds,  especially  in  times  of 
revival,  and  how  the  appearance  of  asceticism  has 
often  been  maintained  by  those  who  had  no  sym- 
pathy with  the  spirit  out  of  which  it  sprang,  we  shall 
not  wonder  so  much  at  the  exaggeiated  opinions  on 
this  subject  which  speedily  became  current.  It  is 
possible  that  their  adversaries  have  imputed  to  the 
Puritans  sentiments  and  expressions  for  which  they 
were  not  wholly  responsible  ;  yet  the  testimony  on 
the  subject  is  so  general  and  consentient  that  there 
cannot  be  much  exaggeration  in  the  accounts  given 
of  their  beliefs  and  habits.  Thus,  one  is  said  to 
have  declared  that  the  doing  of  work  on  the  Lord's 
Day  was  as  great  a  sin  as  murder  or  adultery ;  and 
the  same  was  said  of  the  ringing  of  more  than  one 
bell  on  the  Lord's  Day.  Churchmen,  headed  by 
Whitgift,  set  themselves  against  what  they  regarded 
as  mischievous  errors ;  but  the  religious  spirit  of  the 
age  was  against  them,  and  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 
this  movement,  which  went  on  increasing  in  force, 
contributed  largely  to  the  fashioning  of  the  sombre 
character  and  disposition  of  the  Puritans  in  the 
Commonwealth. 

Still  more  serious  and  threivtening,  however,  was  a 
controversy  which  arose  on  the  subject  of  the  divine 
decrees,  and  became  embodied  in  a  series  of  articles 
which  came  near  to  being  imposed  upon  the  Church 
of  England,  as  part  of  her  doctrinal  system.  To 
those  who  consider  the  Elizabethan  period  from  the 
point  of  view  of  our  own  times,  the  influence  of 
Calvinism  at  that  time  may  seem  a  very  extraordi- 


Calvinistic  Tendencies.  843 

nary  phenomenon,  as  it  certainly  was  a  very  potent 
element  in  the  life  of  the  day.  When,  however,  it 
is  remembered  that  nearly  all  the  great  reformers, 
preeminently  Luther  and  Calvin,  were  disciples  of  St. 
Augustine ;  and  that  the  theology  of  that  great 
father  became  the  basis  of  the  great  Protestant  Con- 
fessions, our  surprise  may  cease.  Luther  might  be 
called  a  pure  Augustinian.  Even  the  supralapsarian- 
ism  of  Calvin  was  different  more  in  appearance  than 
in  reality,  giving  a  kind  of  logical  completeness  to 
the  older  system.  Besides  it  can  hardly  be  denied 
that,  as  the  Jansenists  adhered  to  Augustine,  whilst 
the  Jesuits  were  tainted  with  Pelagianism,  it  was  not 
unnatural  that  Arminianism  and  Romanism  on  the 
one  hand,  and  Calvinism  and  Protestantism  on  the 
other,  should  come  to  be  associated. 

These  considerations  ma}/  help  us  to  understand 
how  even  a  Churchman  so  strong  and  anti-puritan- 
ical as  Whitgift  should  have  given  in  to  this  tend- 
ency. The  controversy  arose  through  the  denial  of 
the  indefectibility  of  faith,  in  a  sermon  preached  at 
Cambridge,  by  Mr.  Barret,  a  fallow  of  Caius  College. 
Dr.  Whitaker,  the  Regius  Professor  of  Divinity, 
had  tlie  matter  brought  before  the  Archbishop,  who 
appointed  a  body  of  divines  to  consider  and  report 
upon  the  subject.  As  a  result  they  drew  up  the  fol- 
lowing nine  propositions,  generally  known  as  the 
Lambeth  Articles:  1.  God  hath  from  eternity  pre- 
destinated some  to  life,  and  reprobated  others  to 
death.  2.  The  moving  cause  of  Predestination  to 
life  is  not  the  prevision  of  faith  or  of  perseverance, 
or  of  good  works,  or  of  anything  that  is  in  the  per- 


344  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

son  predestinated ;  but  only  the  will  of  the  good 
pleasure  of  God.  3.  Tlie  predestinated  are  a  pre- 
determined and  certain  number,  vvhicli  can  neither 
be  diminished  nor  increased.  4.  Sucli  as  are  not 
predestined  to  salvation  will  inevitably  be  condemned 
on  account  of  their  sins.  6.  A  true,  lively,  and 
justifying  faith,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  justifying,  is 
not  extinguished,  doth  not  utterly  fail,  nor  vanish 
away  in  the  elect,  eitlier  totally  or  finally.  6.  A 
true  believer,  that  is,  one  endued  with  justifying 
faith,  is  certified  by  the  full  assurance  of  faith  that 
his  sins  are  forgiven,  and  that  he  shall  be  everlast- 
ingly saved  through  Christ.  7.  Saving  grace  is  not 
given,  is  not  communicated,  is  not  granted  to  all 
men,  by  which  they  might  be  saved,  if  the}'  would. 
8.  No  man  can  come  to  Christ,  unless  it  be  given 
him,  and  unless  the  Father  draw  him ;  and  all  men 
are  not  drawn  by  the  Father,  that  they  may  come  to 
the  Son.  9.  It  is  not  put  in  the  will  and  power  of 
every  man  to  be  saved. 

These  Articles  were  not  the  work  of  any  regularly 
constituted  assembly,  neither  were  they  accepted  by 
the  Church ;  but  they  were  for  some  time  used  as 
a  practical  test  in  the  case  of  persons  suspected  of 
Arminianism.  It  is  not  very  likely  that  Convoca- 
tion would  have  sanctioned  them  ;  but  Queen  Eliza- 
beth and  her  powerful  minister  gave  them  no  oppor- 
tunity of  doing  so.  Her  Majesty  declared  to  the 
Archbishop  that  "she  misliked  much  that  any  allow- 
ance had  been  given  by  his  Grace  and  the  rest,  for 
any  such  points  to  be  disputed,  being  a  matter  tender 
and  dangerous  to  weak  ignorant  minds ; "  and  Bur- 


The  Lambeth  Articles,  845 

leigh  told  Whitaker  that  they  were  *'  charging  God 
with  cruelty,  and  might  make  men  to  be  desperate  in 
their  wickedness." 

The  Calvinism  of  the  Lambeth  Articles  having 
been  assailed  by  the  Lady  Margaret  Professor  of 
Divinity  at  Cambridge,  a  Frenchman  named  Peter 
Baro,  the  Vice-chancellor,  Dr.  Good,  charged  him 
with  heresy,  and  the  Archbishop  accorded  a  certain 
sympathy  to  the  Vice-chancellor;  but  whetlier  the 
royal  influence  induced  prudential  considerations,  or 
whether  a  further  study  of  the  question,  aided  by 
the  suggestions  of  other  divines,  led  him  to  modify 
his  views  of  Calvinism,  the  Archbishop  managed  to 
put  a  stop  to  the  controversy. 

Tins  business  of  the  Lambeth  Articles  undoubtedly 
helps  candid  students  of  English  Church  History  to 
determine  the  question  whether  the  Article  (XVIL) 
on  Predestination  and  Election  is  to  be  understood 
in  a  Calvinistic  sense.  It  is  obvious  to  remark  that, 
if  that  were  the  case,  the  Lambeth  Articles  would 
have  been  unnecessary ;  and,  if  they  formed  merely 
an  exposition  of  the  teaching  of  the  seventeenth 
article,  there  could  have  been  no  serious  opposition 
to  their  adoption.  Apart,  however,  from  the  contro- 
versial aspect  of  the  matter,  certain  points  are  theo- 
logically certain.  In  the  first  place,  the  Lambeth 
Articles  are  pure  and  undiluted  Calvinism ;  whereas 
the  seventeenth  article  is  not  even  definitely  Augus- 
tinian.  It  may  be  described  as  simply  Pauline,  for 
there  is  not  a  phrase  or  an  expression  which  does  not 
come,  literally  or  in  effect,  from  the  writings  of  St. 
Paul.    If  it  is  said  that  it  is  patient  of  an  Augustinian 


346  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

^  —   .  ■  ■  —  .1  .1.1  I  ■—  I  ■       I.  ■    ^m  —    ■  -  ■^-        ■  -   ■       ,        ■  I—   .       ..I  ■  -      ■       ^ 

or  Calvinistic  meaning,  the  simple  answer  must  be, 
that  it  is  susceptible  of  such  a  meaning  just  as  the 
writings  of  St.  Paul  are  so  susceptible,  and  in  no 
other  sense.  It  is  quite  clear  that  the  compilers  of 
the  Article  meant  to  leave  its  meaning  so  far  open, 
neither  excluding  Calvinists  from  the  ministry  of  the 
Church,  nor  compelling  all  to  be  of  that  way  of 
thinking. 

The  subject  of  the  treatment  of  Roman  Catholics 
in  the  reign  of  Elizabeth  has  been  much  discussed ; 
but  the  matter  is  in  reality  very  simple.  It  is  to  the 
action  of  the  papal  see  that  we  must  refer  in  order 
to  understand  the  measures  taken  against  the  Roman 
Catholics.  For  some  time  the  Queen  had  hopes  of 
uniting  all  her  subjects  in  one  Church  ;  and  the 
Roman  Catholics,  for  a  time,  attended  the  parish 
churches.  Pius  IV.  hoped,  by  patience  and  forbear- 
ance, to  win  back  the  Queen  of  England  to  the  fold ; 
but  his  successor,  Pius  V.,  was  determined  on  more 
offensive  action ;  and  in  1569  he  fulminated  an  ex- 
communication against  her.  The  result  was  far  from 
satisfactory.  "  If,"  says  Lingard,,  "  the  Pontiff  prom- 
ised himself  any  particular  benefit  from  this  meas- 
ure, the  result  must  have  disappointed  his  expecta- 
tions. The  time  was  gone  by  when  the  thunders  of 
the  Vatican  could  shake  the  thrones  of  princes.  By 
foreign  powers  the  bull  was  suffered  to  sleep  in 
silence ;  among  the  English  Catholics  it  served  only 
to  breed  doubts,  dissension,  and  dismay.  .  .  All 
agreed  that  it  was,  in  their  regard,  an  imprudent  and 
cruel  expedient,  which  rendered  them  liable  to  the 
suspicion  of  disloyalty,  and  afforded  their  enemies  a 


Roman  Catholics  in  England,  347 

pretence  to  brand  them  with  the  name  of  traitors." 
This  is  the  deliberate  judgment  of  a  calm  and  thought- 
ful Roman  Catholic  historian. 

For  a  time  the  result  was  not  obvious.  The  Ro- 
man Catholics  might  hold  their  services  in  private,  if 
they  chose.  An  Act  of  Parliament  was  passed  iu 
1671,  by  way  of  reply  to  the  Papal  Bull,  declaring 
all  to  be  traitors,  who  should  become  reconciled  to 
the  see  of  Rome,  or  who  should  bring  any  Papal 
Bulls  into  the  country.  But  this  did  not  deter  some 
zealous  Roman  Catholic  priests  from  undertaking  a 
mission  to  England,  partly  to  keep  alive  the  faith 
among  members  of  their  Church,  and  partly  in  the 
hope  of  winning  back  others  to  the  fold.  If  these 
men  had  confined  themselves  to  merely  religious  in- 
struction, it  is  probable  that  the  Government  might 
have  connived  at  their  doings.  But  it  was  made 
quite  clear  that  loyalty  to  the  Pope  meant  disloyalty 
and  treason  against  the  Queen  of  England. 

In  1577  Cuthbert  Mayne  was  put  to  death  for 
having  brought  in  a  bull;  but  the  meaning  of  his 
offence  was  his  holding  the  right  of  Roman  Catholics 
to  rise  in  insurrection  against  the  government  of  the 
Queen.  In  1580  twa  Jesuit  priests,  Parsons  and 
Campion  came  over,  authorized  to  explain  that  the 
bull  of  deposition  laid  upon  Roman  Catholics  do 
obligation  to  immediate  action.  At  the  same  time 
they  prosecuted  their  missionary  work  with  great 
ardpr. 

In  1581  Parliament  passed  the  first  of  the  Recu- 
tancy  Laws.  These  went  further  than  the  Act  of 
1671,  now  inflicting  fines  and  imprisonment  for  say- 


348  l^he  Anrjlican  Reformation. 

ing  or  hearing  Muss,  and  fines  upon  those  even  who 
refused  to  go  to  church.  From  this  time  Roman 
Catholics  were  sometimes  subjected  to  torture,  to 
make  them  give  information  which  might  lead  to  the 
apprehension  of  priests.  Parsons  escaped  to  the  con- 
tinent from  which  he  directed  operations  in  England. 
Campion  was  taken  and  executed  (1581).  It  seemed 
necessary  to  the  ordinary  loyal  Englishman  to  crush 
the  brood  of  conspirators  against  the  rule  and  life 
of  the  Queen  who  were  now  springing  up.  There 
can  be  no  doubt  that  the  assassination  of  the  Queen 
was  plotted  by  those  who  set  a  price  upon  tlie  head 
of  William  the  Silent,  and  brought  about  his  assassi- 
nation in  1584.  We  suppose,  the  Jesuits  would  have 
had  no  scruple  in  making  away  with  the  Queen,  even 
if  in  doing  so  some  of  them  had  sacrificed  their  own 
lives. 

The  offences  for  which  the  Roman  Catholics  suf- 
fered under  Elizabeth  were  political  offences.  "  Our 
religion  is  our  only  crime,"  pleaded  some  of  them ; 
but  they  must  have  known  better.  When  they  were 
required  to  say  what  they  thought  of  the  excommu- 
nication and  deposition  of  the  Queen  by  the  Papal 
Bull,  tliey  evaded  the  question,  and  they  had  to  suf- 
fer; but  it  was  for  treason.  It  is  said  that  in  the 
last  twenty  years  of  Elizabeth's  reign  two  hundred 
priests  were  put  to  death  (no  laymen  suffered),  whilst 
a  still  greater  number  perished  in  prison.  But  it  is 
difficult  to  condemn  the  action  of  the  Government, 
unless  wo  would  maintain  the  lawfulness  of  rebellion ; 
since  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  the  veracity  of  llie 
ministers  of  Elizaboth  wl  en  they  declared  that  no 


Elizabeth  and  Romans,  349 

niim  in  her  reign  suffered  for  liis  religion,  and  it  is 
the  deliberate  judgment  of  Hallam,  that  any  man  in 
tiiis  reign  might  have  saved  his  life  by  denying  the 
Pope's  power  to  depose  the  Queen ;  and  Hume  goes 
so  far  as  to  say  that,  making  allowance  for  the  pre- 
vailing prejudices  of  the  times,  the  Queen's  conduct 
in  dealing  with  Roman  Catholics  could  scarcely  be 
accused  of  severity. 

When  Elizabeth  died  in  1603,  Romanism  and 
Puritanism  were  both  at  a  very  low  ebb ;  and  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  policy  of  the  Queen  and  Wliitgift 
might  have  resulted  in  consequences  very  different 
from  the  events  of  the  future  history  of  the  Church. 
Those  who  valued  the  characteristic  principles  of 
Anglicanism  must  always  feel  that  they  owe  a  great 
debt  to  Elizabeth.  We  may  speak  of  her  coarseness, 
her  profanity,  her  stinginess,  and  her  vanity  j  but 
she  had  a  sound  English  heart,  she  loved  her  people 
and  desired  their  love,  she  toiled  unremittingly  for 
their  good ;  and  she  seldom  erred  in  her  ends  or 
even  in  the  means  by  which  she  sought  to  bring 
them  about. 


CHAPTER  XXIV. 

RICHARD  HOOKER. 

I  HE  great  name  of  Richard  Hooker  de- 
mands a  special  attention  from  those  who 
study  the  history  and  character  of  the 
Church  of  England.  Both  as  a  great  ex< 
ample  of  English  style  and  as  an  expounder  of  the 
principles  of  Anglicanism,  he  holds  a  place  unique 
and  supreme.  As  an  English  writer  he  has  been 
placed  beside  Bacon  who  was  seven  years  his  junior. 
As  a  writer  and  thinker,  he  may  be  compared  with 
Pascal ;  and  it  would  be  difficult  to  accord  him 
higher  honor. 

Hooker  was  born  at  Heavitree  near  Exeter,  in 
1554  and  died  in  1600,  only  forty-six  years  of  age. 
His  family  seems  to  have  been  of  some  importance ; 
but  his  father  was  in  poor  circumstances.  His 
progress  at  the  Exeter  Grammar  School  was  so  re- 
markable that  his  teacher  got  his  uncle,  John  Hooker, 
to  interest  himself  in  his  education.  By  the  in- 
fluence of  this  uncle,  Richard  became  acquainted 
with  Jewel,  then  Bishop  of  Salisbury ;  who  got 
for  him  a  Bible  clerkship  at  Corpus  Christi  College, 
Oxford.  When  Jewel  died  in  1571,  Bishop  Sandys, 
of  London,  interested  himself  in  Hooker,  and  made 
him  tutor  to  his  son  Edwin  at  Oxford.  Hooker  took 
his  Bachelor's  degree  in  January,  1674,  and  M.  A. 

350 


Life  of  Hooker.  851 


in  July  1677,  in  the  same  year  obtaining  a  fellow- 
sliip. 

Although  Hooker  was  essentially  a  theologian,  be 
was  widely  read  and  deeply  versed  in  many  subjects. 
While  at  Oxford  he  was  appointed  deputy  to  the 
Professor  of  Hebrew.  For  some  reason,  he  was 
driven  from  Oxford  for  a  time,  probably  by  the 
vice-president  of  his  college,  who  was  an  extreme 
Puritan.  But  he  returned  to  Oxford  and  took  orders 
in  1581,  and  in  the  same  year  preached  for  the  first 
time  at  Paul's  Cross. 

The  story  of  Hooker's  unfortunate  marriage  is 
well  known.  Mrs.  Hooker  has  been  not  improperly 
compared  to  Xanthippe.  Walton,  in  his  classical 
life  of  Hooker,  tells  how,  when  his  pupils  Cranmer 
and  Sandys  came  to  visit  him,  they  found  him  in  a 
field  reading  the  Odes  of  Horace  while  tending  his 
sheep.  But  they  were  soon  deprived  of  his  "quiet 
company  '*  by  his  wife  coming  and  ordering  him 
to  rock  the  cradle.  They  were  naturally  shocked  at 
the  tyranny  to  which  their  revered  tutor  was  sub- 
ject, and  took  their  leave.  It  has  been  said  that  the 
terms  of  Hooker's  will,  in  which  he  makes  Mrs. 
Hooker,  whom  he  styles  "  my  well-beloved  wife " 
sole  executrix  and  residuary  legatee,  prove  that  the 
marriage  was  not  altogether  an  unhappy  one;  but 
the  inference  is  far  from  certain. 

It  has  already  been  told  how  Hooker  was  ap- 
pointed preacher  at  the  Temple  (1585)  at  the  time 
when  the  Puritan  Travers,  who  had  been  destined  for 
that  post,  was  reader.  It  seemed  a  most  undesir- 
able state  of  things  that  the  preacher  should  in  the 


352  The  Anrjlican  Reformation. 

morning  promulgate  teftchings  which  were  assailed 
by  the  reader  in  tlie  afternoon.  Yet  it  is  to  this  cir- 
cunistanee  that  we  owe  Hooker's  great  work.  "The 
pulpit,"  says  Fuller,  "  spake  pure  Canterbury  in  the 
morning  and  Geneva  in  the  afternoon."  Hooker 
was  never  a  popular  preacher  and  Tiavers  seemed  to 
get  more  of  the  public  favor,  and  moreover  at  that 
time  there  was  a  large  public  sentiment  favorable  to 
Puritanism.  Travers,  being  silenced  by  Whitgift, 
on  the  ground  that  he  had  only  Presbyterian  orders, 
appealed  to  the  Council,  and  u  controversy  began 
between  him  and  Hooker,  conducted  in  a  respectful 
manner  on  both  sides.  This  led  Hooker  to  a  more 
careful  study  of  the  questions  between  them,  and  at 
his  own  request  he  was  presented  by  the  Archbishop 
to  a  country  living,  Boscombe  in  Wiltshire,  where  he 
might  more  peacefully  prosecute  his  studies.  Here 
he  speedily  completed  the  half  of  his  work.  In 
July,  1695,  he  was  promoted  to  Bishopsbourne,  near 
Canterbury,  where  he  died  and  lies  buried. 

Both  Walton  and  Fuller  speak  of  Hooker's  re- 
markable humility  and  simplicity.  Walton  says  he 
was  "  of  a  mean  stature  and  stooping,  and  yet  more 
lo,vly  in  the  thoughts  of  his  soul ;  his  body  worn  out 
not  with  age  but  study  and  holy  mortifications;" 
and  again  he  says  he  was  of  a  mild  and  humble 
nature.  But,  as  Keble  remarks,  "these  qualities 
were  by  no  means  constitutional  in  him.  Like 
Moses,  to  whom  Walton  compares  him,  he  was  by 
iiature  extremely  sensitive,  quick  in  feeling  any  sort 
of  unfairness,  and  thoroughly  aware  of  his  own 
power  to  chastise  it :  so  that  his  forbearance  must 


The  Ecclesiastical  Polity.  853 

have  been  the  reault  of  strong  principle  and  un- 
wearied self  control."  Walton,  Keble  thinks,  was 
further  mistaken  in  considering  Hooker  childishly 
ignorant  of  human  nature  and  of  the  ordinary  busi- 
ness of  life  J  "  whereas,"  he  says,  **  his  writings  be- 
tray uncommon  shrewdness  and  quickness  of  ob- 
servation,  and  a  vein  of  the  keenest  humor  runs 
through  them,  the  last  quality  we  should  look  for,  if 
we  judged  only  by  reading  the  Life." 

The  first  four  books  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Policy 
were  publislied  in  1593,  the  author  stating  that  he 
thought  it  better  to  let  these  go  forth  by  themselves 
rather  than  wait  for  the  remainder.  ^^Such  gener- 
alities,"  he  says,  **  as  are  here  handled  it  will  be  per- 
haps not  amiss  to  consider  apart,  as  by  way  of  in- 
troduction into  the  books  that  are  to  follow  concern- 
ing particulars.  In  1597  the  fifth  book  appeared, 
somewhat  longer  than  all  the  first  four.  No  more 
appeared  during  Hooker's  life.  Some  doubt  remains 
as  to  the  fate  of  the  remaining  three  books ;  but  it 
seems  probable  that  they  were  destroyed  by  Mrs. 
Hooker  at  the  suggestion  of  some  Puritan  friends 
who  did  not  wish  to  perpetuate  Hooker's  influence 
against  their  own  views.  The  sixth  and  eighth  books 
were  found  among  his  papers ;  and  afterwards  the 
seventh.  The  last  discovered  is  the  most  complete 
of  the  three ;  the  sixth  consisting  of  a  set  of  notes 
on  various  subjects. 

The  first  five  books  form  a  work  of  remarkable 
dignity  and  power  ;  and  illustrate  the  great  capabili- 
ties of  the  noble  language  in  which  they  are  written. 
"  His  style,"  says  Fuller,  "  was  long  and  pithy, 
W 


854  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

driving  on  a  whole  flock  of  causes  before  he  cornea 
to  the  close  of  a  sentence."  In  the  words  of 
Hallam,  "  Hooker  not  only  opened  the  mine,  but  ex- 
plored the  depths  of  our  native  eloquence."  The 
greatness  of  the  work  was  recogiiizeil  at  once. 
Walton  relates  that  when  the  first  book  was  read  to 
Pope  Clement  XII.,  he  declared,  "  There  is  no  learn- 
ing that  this  man  hath  not  searched  into ;  nothing 
too  hard  for  his  understanding ; "  and  gave  orders 
that  it  should  be  translated  into  Latin. 

The  object  of  Hooker's  work  was  to  defend,  on 
grounds  of  reason,  the  Anglican  settlement  of 
ecclesiastical  government.  The  Puritans  contended 
that  every  doctrine  and  institution  should  be  derived 
from  the  Scriptures,  and  that  any  addition  to  these 
was  wrong.  Hooker,  on  the  contrary,  maintained 
that  human  conduct  was  to  be  guided  by  "  all  the 
sources  of  light  and  truth  with  which  man  finds 
himself  encompassed."  Natural  law  lies  at  the 
basis  of  all,  embodies  God's  supreme  reason,  and  ap- 
points to  the  whole  field  of  Nature  the  means  by 
which  it  works  out  perfection  in  several  parts.  The 
principle  set  forth  in  the  treatise  was  stated  in  the 
Sermon  on  Pride,  one  of  the  course  condemned  by 
Travers. 

Speaking  of  the  difference  between  m:>ral  and 
natural  law  on  the  one  hand,  and  positive  or  mu- 
table law  on  the  other,  Hooker  says  that  the  fact  of 
this  difference  not  being  observed  "hath  not  a  little 
obscured  justice.  It  is  no  small  perplexity  which 
this  thing  hath  bred  in  the  minds  of  many,  who  be- 
holding the  laws  which  God  Himself  hath  given, 


Oerm  of  Ilooker^s  Aryument.  865 


abrogated  and  disannulled  by  human  authority,  im- 
agine that  ice  is  hereby  conculcated  ;  that  men 
take  upon  Ihcm  to  be  wiser  than  God  Himself;  that 
unto  their  devices  His  ordinances  are  constrained  to 
give  place  :  which  popular  discourses,  when  they  are 
polished  with  such  art  and  cunning  as  some  men'ti 
wits  are  well  acquainted  with,  it  is  no  hard  matter 
with  such  tunes  to  enchant  most  religiously  affected 
souls.  The  root  of  which  error  is  a  misconceit  that 
all  laws  are  positive  which  men  establish,  and  all 
laws  wliich  God  delivereth  immutable.  No,  it  is  not 
the  author  which  maketh,  but  the  matter  whereon 
they  are  made,  that  causeth  laws  to  be  thus  distin- 
guished." Here  we  have,  as  Keble  remarks,  the  very 
rudiment  and  germ  of  that  argument. 

The  heart  of  the  whole  controversy  was  the  ques- 
tion of  Church  authority,  the  question  with  whom 
Church  authority  resides.  On  this  point  there  were 
three  great  parties.  The  first  was  that  of  the  Ul- 
tramontanes,  who  refused  to  the  civil  government 
any  prerogative  beyond  that  of  executing  what  the 
Popes  and  Councils  should  decree.  The  second  of 
those  who  maintained  the  claims  of  the  local  govern- 
ment against  the  Papacy,  holding  that  Church  laws 
and  constitutions  are  left  by  Providence  to  the  dis- 
cretion of  the  civil  power.  Most  of  the  early  re- 
formers adhered  to  this  view.  A  third  party  had 
arisen  during  the  period  of  the  Reformation,  who 
agreed  with  the  Ron:an  Catholics  in  acknowledging 
a  Church  authority  independent  of  the  State,  but 
thought  that  it  should  be  assigned  to  a  mixed  coun- 
cil of   Presbyters   lay  and  spiritual,  who  derived 


:\  '  T      -•  ■ 


356  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

their  authority  froir  the  Scriptures.  Hooker  ad- 
hered to  the  second  of  these  theories. 

It  would  have  seemed  the  simplest  line  to  insist, 
as  against  the  Puritans,  that  the  bishops  had  their 
succession  from  the  apostles  and  therefore  had  the 
same  authority  which  belonged  to  tiieni.  This, 
however,  was  not  the  line  taken  by  Jewel,  Whitgift, 
and  others.  They  appealed  to  Christian  antiquity 
in  regard  to  the  doctrines  which  they  confessed,  in 
opposition  to  Roman  or  Puritan.  But  in  regard  to 
episcopacy  they  are  content  to  show  that  the  govern- 
ment by  bishops  is  ancient  and  allowable.  Such  a 
position  was  taken  partly  out  of  consideration  for 
the  reformed  churches  on  the  Continent,  and  partly 
because  they  had  not  that  knowledge  of  Christian 
antiquity  which  we  now  possess.  For  example,  the 
writings  of  St.  Ignatius,  which  are  now  on  all  hands 
recognized  as  of  capital  importance,  had  not  yet 
been  vindicated  as  genuine.  The  Anglican  contro- 
versialists of  that  period  were  content  to  defend  their 
own  position  by  arguing  that  the  Church  having  from 
the  earliest  times  decided  to  be  governed  by  bishops, 
it  would  not  be  right  to  depart  from  that  government 
when  it  could  be  had  in  union  with  sound  doctrine 
and  the  rights  of  the  Chief  Magistrate. 

Hooker  was  very  careful  to  assert  this  argument 
with  great  inoderation.  ♦♦  For  mine  own  part,"  he 
says,  "  although  I  see  that  certain  reformed  churches, 
the  Scottish  especially  and  the  French,  have  not  that 
which  best  agreeth  with  the  Sacred  Scripture,  I 
mean  the  government  that  is  by  bishops,  .  .  .  this 
their  defect  and  imperfection  I  had  rather  lament  in 


Hooker  on  Episcopacy.  857 

such  case  than  exagitate,  considering  that  men  often- 
times, without  any  fault  of  their  own,  may  be  driven 
to  want  that  kind  of  polity  or  regiment  which  is 
best."  These  remarks  are  admirable  and  in  the 
spirit  of  the  best  of  the  Anglican  reformers,  who 
knew  that  several  of  the  foreign  reformed  churches 
would  gladly  have  retained  the  episcopal  government, 
if  that  had  been  possible,  but  who  yet  regarded 
doctrinal  truth  as  of  more  importance  than  apostolic 
government. 

A^  the  same  time  it  must  be  observed,  as  Mr.  Ke- 
ble  rt  .narks,  that  Hooker's  view  does  not  represent 
the  high  water  mark  of  Anglicanism.  There  is,  he 
says,  "  a  marked  distinction  between  that  which  now 
perhaps  we  may  venture  to  call  the  school  of  Hooker 
and  that  of  Laud,  Hammond,  and  Leslie."  And  Mr. 
Keble  goes  on :  **  He,  as  well  as  they,  regarded  the 
order  of  bishops  as  being  immediately  and  properly  of 
Divine  right ;  he  as  well  as  they  laid  down  principles 
which,  strictly  followed  up,  would  make  this  claim 
exclusive.  But  he,  in  common  with  most  of  his  con- 
temporaries, shrunk  from  the  legitimate  result  of  his 
own  premises,  the  rather,  as  the  fulness  of  apostolic 
authority  on  this  point  had  never  come  within  his 
cognizance;  whereas  the  next  generation  of  divines 
entered  on  the  subject,  as  was  before  observed,  fresli 
from  the  study  of  St.  Ignatius."  It  is  possible  that 
Keble  pitches  a  little  too  high  the  point  of  view  of 
Hooker,  but  the  reader  can  judge  of  this  for  himself. 

Another  matter  of  controversy  between  Hooker 
and  the  Puritans  related  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Holy 
Trinity;  but  this  need  not  here  be  entered  upon. 


858  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

We  cannotf  however,  properly  pass  by  that  which 
related  to  the  Sacraments.  In  the  first  place,  as  re- 
gards the  Incarnation  and  our  engrafting  into  Christ, 
Hooker  repudiates  the  merely  analogical  interpreta- 
tion. "It  is  too  cold  an  interpretation,"  he  says, 
**  whereby  some  men  expound  our  being  in  Christ  to 
impart  nothing  else,  but  only  that  the  selfsame  na- 
ture which  maketh  us  to  be  men  is  in  Plim,  and 
maketh  Him  man  as  we  are.  For  what  man  in  the 
world  is  there,  which  hath  not  so  far  forth  com- 
munion with  Jesus  Christ?  It  is  not  this  that  can 
sustain  the  weight  of  such  sentences  as  speak  of  the 
mystery  of  our  coherence  with  Jesus  Christ." 
Hooker  evidently  was  not  one  of  those  who  would 
banisii  the  mystical  from  revelation  and  religion. 

In  the  same  way,  he  could  not  agree  with  those 
who  regarded  the  sacraments  merely  as  expressive 
actions,  nor  with  those  who  failed  to  recognize  the 
special  grace  connected  with  the  Sacraments.  He 
teaches  explicitly  that  Baptism  is  the  only  ordinary 
means  of  regeneration,  and  the  Eucharist  the  only  ordi- 
nary means  whereby  Christ's  body  and  blood  can  bo 
taken  and  received.  Concerning  Baptism  he  says,  "As 
we  are  not  naturally  men  without  birth,  so  neither  are 
we  Christian  men  in  the  eye  of  the  Church  of  God, 
but  by  new  birth;  nor,  according  to  the  manifest 
ordinary  course  of  Divine  dispensation  newborn,  but 
by  that  Baptism  which  both  declareth  and  maketh  us 
Christiana."  Concerning  the  two  great  Sacraments 
he  says:  "It  is  not  ordinarily  His  will  to  bestow  the 
grace  of  Sacraments  on  any,  but  by  the  Sacraments;** 
and  he  explains  the  words  of  our  Lord  in  the  sixth 


Sacraments  and  Ceremonies'  869 

chapter  of  St.  John,  concerning  the  eating  of  His 
flesh  and  drinking  His  blood,  as  referring  to  the 
Eucharist. 

In  regard  to  ceremonies,  also,  tho  tone  of  Hooker 
was  widely  different  from  that  of  many  of  the  reform- 
ers, even  of  such  men  as  Cranrner  or  Jewel,  who 
sometimes  speak  with  a  certain  impatience  or  even 
contempt  of  things  which  Hooker  treats  with  respect 
or  at  least  with  tolerance.  Nor  was  this,  on  his 
part,  as  some  have  suggested,  a  mere  survival  of  tra- 
ditional views.  Hooker  had  been  brought  up  under 
Puritan  influences  and  had  found  his  way  to  these 
convictions  by  a  deep  and  independent  study  of  the 
Scriptures  and  of  Christian  antiquity.  In  this  way 
he  contended  for  the  lawfulness  of  the  use  of  religious 
symbolism,  on  the  ground  that  sensible  things  may 
have  meanings  beyond  those  which  appear  on  the 
surface,  may  have  spiritual  and  heavenly  meanings 
the  consideration  of  which  may  raise  us  up  to  the 
realization  of  things  divine.  Thus  certain  actions  of 
the  body,  as  bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus,  and  turn- 
ing to  the  East  in  prayer;  certain  forms  of  matter, 
as  the  cross  and  the  ring;  such  things  having  a  cer- 
tain intelligible  meaning,  might  be  almost  necessary 
for  children;  and  such  things  the  Church  "instinc- 
tively selected  for  her  ceremonies,  and  combined 
them  by  degrees  into  ^r  orderly  system,  varying  as 
circumstances  might  uire  in  different  dioceses,  but 
every wliere  constituting  a  kind  of  perpetual  sacrifice; 
offering  to  the  Most  Holy  Trinity  so  many  samples 
(if  we  may  so  call  them)  or  specimens  of  our  com- 
mon hourly  actions,  and  of  the  material  objects  in 


860  T?ie  Anglican  Reformation. 

which  we  are  most  conversant,  as  tithes  are  a  sample 
and  specimen  of  our  whole  property,  and  holy  days 
of  our  whole  time:  likely  tlierefore,  as  tithes  and 
holy  days  are,  by  devout  using  to  bring  down  a  bless- 
ing on  the  whole." ' 

Thus  he  speaks  of  fasting  as  having  distinct  prac- 
tical benefits;  of  the  Lord's  Day  (not  as  the  Sab- 
bath) as  resting  on  a  mixed  ground  of  ritual  and  of 
moral  obligation ;  of  Saints'  Days  as  being  in  one 
sense  determined  by  God's  own  voice,  yet  also  by  the 
authorized  legislation  of  His  Church.  Ho  has  no 
sympathy  with  the  rude  indifference  to  all  festivals 
but  Sunday,  or  with  the  excessive  pretension  of  re- 
gard for  the  Lord's  Day.  Li  all  his  judgments  he 
was  guided  at  once  by  considerations  of  religion,  of 
ecclesiastical  custom  and  authority,  and  of  sanctified 
common  sense.  On  one  point  he  had  no  sympathy 
with  some  of  the  pretended  reformers  who  were 
always  ready  to  make  gain  by  the  robbery  of  the 
Church.  In  his  view,  whatever  had  been  dedicated 
to  God,  whether  land  or  house  or  treasure,  was  to  be 
regarded  as  sacred  and  inalienable.  To  divert  such 
property  to  secular  purposes  was,  in  his  opinion, 
sacrilege;  the  same  as  though  a  clergyman  should 
abandon  his  sacred  calling  and  take  the  place  of  a 
layman  again.  Yet  he  would  not  apply  this  princi- 
ple to  the  secularization  of  the  revenues  of  the  re- 
ligious houses,  since  their  goods  might  be  regarded  as 
partly  of  the  nature  of  civil  possessions  such  as 
are  held  by  other  kinds  of  corporations.  Whatever, 
however,  had  been  clearly  dedicated  to  God  could, 
'  Keble :  Preface  to  the  Eccles.  Polity. 


Scripture  and  the  Church.  861 

in  his  view,  never  cease  to  be  His,  but  by  His  own 
cession. 

In  the  same  way  Hooker  attributed  a  real  sanctity 
to  consecrated  places  in  opposition  to  the  hard  and 
rationalistic  views  of  the  Brownists.  He  also  pro- 
tested against  the  notion  becoming  prevalent  that  the 
sermon  alone  was  the  "  quick  and  forcible  word  of 
God,  to  the  disparagement  of  the  Scriptures  and  forms 
of  prayer,  holding,  as  he  did,  that  a  Church  was  a 
place  of  solemn  homage  and  service  not  only  nor 
chiefly  a  place  of  religious  instruction. 

In  regard  to  the  relation  between  the  Scriptures 
and  the  Church,  he  regarded  the  Church  as  a  witness 
to  the  truth.  According  to  the  Reformation  princi- 
ple, firmly  maintained  by  Hooker  and  all  the  great 
Anglican  divines.  Holy  Scripture  is  paramount  in 
regard  to  doctrine  :  reason  and  Church  authority  be- 
ing only  subsidiary,  interpreting  Scripture  or  deducing 
from  it.  In  regard  to  rites  and  ceremonies,  however, 
which  form  a  kind  of  practical  application  of  doc- 
trine, apostolical  traditions,  which  can  be  proved  to 
be  truly  such,  must  be  regarded  as  binding,  just  as  if 
they  were  found  in  the  writhigs  of  tlie  Apostles. 
"  For  both  being  known  to  be  apostolical,  it  is  not 
the  manner  of  delivering  them  unto  the  Church,  but 
the  author  from  whom  they  proceed,  which  doth 
give  them  their  force  and  credit." 

With  regard  to  the  Divine  decrees,  Hooker  was 
certainly  not  Calvinislic  or  an  adherent  of  the  Lam- 
beth Articles ;  but  he  was  undoubtedly  very  near  to 
what  might  be  properly  called  Augustinianism ;  al- 
though even  here  he  has  safeguards  quite  in  accord- 


862  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ance  with  his  cautious,  deep,  and  well-balanced  judg- 
ment. 

The  influence  which  Hooker  exerted  on  tlie  Church 
of  England  is  not  to  be  estimated  merely  by  the 
contents  of  his  great  work,  and  its  position  in  the 
literature  of  the  Anglican  comniuniun ;  but  in  the 
creation  of  a  school  of  writers  who  looked  to  him  as 
their  master,  who  not  only  carried  on  the  great  tra- 
dition of  his  teaching,  but  who  worked  in  a  spirit  of 
independent  investigation,  and  rendered  permanent 
the  adhesion  of  the  Anglican  Reformation  to  the 
principles  of  Apostolical  order  as  well  as  primitive 
truth.  In  this  and  in  other  ways  the  influence  of 
this  great  scholar  and  thinker  will  never  cease  to  be 
felt  not  merely  in  the  Anglican  Communion,  but  in 
all  those  denominations  which  spring  from  the  same 
root  and  use  the  English  language.* 

'Readers  who  may  wish  for  a  more  complete  estimate    of 
Hooker's  work  should  refer  to  Keble's  Preface,  aud  to  the  late 
Bean  Church's  Introduction  to  the  first  book  of  the  Ecclesiastical 
Polity. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

KING  JAMES  I.  AND  ARCHBISHOP  BANCROFT. 

HEN  it  was  known  that  King  James  of 
Scotland  was  to  be  the  successor  of  Eliza- 
beth, a  very  natural  alarm  took  possession 
of  English  Churchmen,  lest  the  Presbyte- 
rian King  should  throw  all  the  weight  of  his  influence 
on  the  side  of  Puritanism.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
however,  James  had  become  quite  sick  of  Presby- 
terianism,  not  only  because  of  its  democratic  and  re- 
publican tendencies  and  sympathies,  but  also  because 
of  the  despotism  of  its  teachers.  It  was  an  immense 
relief  to  the  religious  leaders  of  the  King's  new 
subjects  when  they  learned  that  he  was  well  ac- 
quainted with  their  system  and  preferred  it  greatly  to 
the  Presbyterian  discipline.  The  Puritans,  however, 
were  not  without  hope  of  gaining  something  in  the 
new  state  of  things:  and  the  Church  party  looked 
forward  with  some  apprehension  to  the  meeting  of 
Parliament. 

Both  parties  addressed  the  King,  the  Puritans 
presenting  a  petition,  signed  by  seven  hundred  and 
fifty  of  their  ministers,  in  which  they  set  forth 
their  grievances,  whilst  the  Universities  replied  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  prejudice  the  King  against  the 
principles  of  the  Puritans.  An  order  was  given  to 
prepare  for  his  Majesty  a  full  statistical  account  of 
the  state  of  the  parishes  and  dioceses,  including  a 

363 


864  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

statement  of  the  number  of 'communicants^  of  recu- 
sants, of  pluralists,  the  value  of  benefices,  and  the 
names  of  the  patrons.  Towards  the  end  of  the  year 
tlie  King  addressed  a  letter  to  the  bishops,  declaring 
his  intention  of  upholding  the  Church  and  enforcing 
the  laws,  but  without  shedding  of  blood.  At  the 
same  time  he  intimated  his  intention  of  having  a 
conference  at  which  the  dissidents  should  be  allowed 
to  state  their  grievances. 

This  is  tlie  origin  of  the  "  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference," which  was  held  in  the  palace  of  that  name 
during  three  days  in  January,  1604.  The  King  evi- 
dently cherished  the  hope  of  bringing  about  a  recon- 
ciliation of  the  contending  parties.  In  announcing, 
by  proclamation,  the  meeting  to  be  held  "  for  the 
hearing  and  determining  things  pretended  to  be 
amiss  in  the  Church,"  he  gave  it  to  be  plainly  un- 
derstood that  he  was  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  ex- 
isting state  of  things,  although  it  was  quite  possible 
that  time  might  have  brought  in  "some  corrup- 
tions which  may  deserve  a  review  and  amendment," 
and  if  such  could  be  pointed  out,  the  King  said,  he 
would  take  the  regular  method  of  setting  them  right 
by  Parliament  or  Convocation. 

It  cannot  be  truly  said  that  this  conference  re- 
flected much  credit  upon  the  wisdom  of  the  King, 
although  it  might  not  be  fair  to  blame  the  Church. 
There  were  but  four  divines  on  the  Puritan  side,  and 
unfortunately  they  were  all  nominated  by  the  King. 
They  were  Drs.  Reynolds  and  Sparkes,  Mr.  Chader- 
ton  and  Mr.  Knewstubbs.  On  the  Church  side  were 
nineteen,  among  them  the  venerable  Primate ;  Ban- 


Hampton  Court  Conference.  865 


croft  the  ablo  but  impetuous  Bishop  of  London,  soon 
to  succeed  Whitgift  at  Canterbury;  Bilson,  Bishop 
of  Winchester,  whom  we  have  noticed  as  the  asserter 
of  the  divine  origin  of  episcopacy.  There  were  also 
present  Andrewes,  then  Dean  of  Westminster,  a 
scholar,  a  theologian,  a  saintly  and  fervid  preacher ; 
Overall,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  author  of  the  part  of  the 
Catechism  on  the  Sacraments;  Field,  afterwards 
Dean  of  Gloucester,  author  of  the  famous  work  "  Of 
the  Church,"  and  others. 

If  the  arrangements  were  bad,  the  conduct  of  the 
conference  was,  if  possible,  worse.  On  the  first  day 
only  the  King  and  bishops  were  present,  so  that  an 
impression  was  produced  that  they  were  taking 
meiisures  for  crushing  their  opponents.  On  the 
other  hand  the  King  stated  that  he  wished  to  satisfy 
himself  on  certain  points  before  the  conference  be- 
gan ;  and  it  must  be  remembered  that  his  Presby- 
terian education  may  have  rendered  it  necessary  for 
him  to  acquaint  himself  with  the  doctrine  and  ritual 
of  the  English  Church. 

It  appears  that  the  King^s  conduct  at  this  meeting 
was  all  that  could  be  desired.  James  was  a  good 
scholar,  having  been  taught  as  he  frequently  boasted, 
by  one  of  the  best  writers  of  Latin  since  classical 
times,  George  Buchanan.  He  was  also  a  man  of 
considerable  learning ;  and  although  he  was  often 
guilty  of  conduct  which  was  childish,  vulgar,  and  in- 
decent, yet  he  was  not  without  a  good  share  of  in- 
telligence  and   common   sense.^     Barlow,  Dean   of 

'  In  the  opinion  of  the  present  writer  Dean  Hook's  remarks  are 
too  severe.  It  wonid  be  difficult  to  give  a  truer  picture  of  James  I. 
than  that  by  Walter  Scott,  in  the  *' Fortunes  of  Nigel." 


366  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Chester,  who  reported  the  conference,  declares: 
♦*  We  were  dismissed  after  three  hours  and  more 
spent ;  which  were  soon  gone,  so  admirably  both  for 
understanding,  and  speech,  and  judgment  did  his 
Majesty  handle  all  those  points,  sending  us  away  not 
with  contentment  only,  but  with  astonishment." 
Here,  we  may  remark,  is  a  specimen  of  the  flattery, 
often  more  gross,  which  King  James  received  from 
even  higher  ecclesiastics  and  in  which  he  greatly  de- 
lighted. If  we  are  inclined  to  criticise  such  utter- 
ances, we  may  remember  the  customs  of  that  age, 
and  the  surprised  delight  of  the  Church  party  at 
finding  their  not  unreasonable  fears  dispelled.  There 
is,  at  least,  no  reason  for  doubting  their  sincerity. 
Even  the  magnificent  dedication  of  the  authorized 
version  of  the  Bible  is  not  without  such  features 
which  to  us  must  seem  blemishes. 

At  the  fir3*i  meeting  the  chief  points  discussed 
were  private  baptism,  confirmation,  and  absolution. 
In  regard  to  the  last  it  was  agreed  that  "  remission 
of  sins  "  should  be  introduced  before  the  general  ab- 
solution; it  was  to  be  made  clear  that  confirmation 
was  no  part  of  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism ;  and 
further,  it  was  decided  that,  instead  of  sanctioning 
the  baptism  of  sick  children  by  nurses,  a  curate  or 
lawful  minister  should  be  called  in.  This  last  point 
was  a  concession  to  the  frequent  contention  of  the 
Puritans  on  this  point.  Bancroft  brought  forward 
ancient  authorities  in  favor  of  lay  baptism  ;  but  the 
King  was  strong  on  the  other  side  and  the  majority 
of  the  bishops  went  with  him. 

This  preliminary  meeting  was  held  on  Saturday, 


/■- 


James  and  the  Puritans.  367 

January  14,  and  on  the  following  Monday,  both 
parties  assembled  before  the  King  who  said  he  was 
ready  to  hear  what  the  four  dissidents  had  to  urge, 
remarking  that  he  understood  them  to  be  among  the 
most  learned  and  reasonable  of  their  party.  Ban- 
croft began  by  protesting  against  the  hearing  of 
schismatics,  apparently  forgetting  how  the  tables 
might  have  been  turned  upon  himself.  The  King, 
however,  told  Dr.  Reynolds  to  go  on.  The  Puritans 
made  their  objections  first  to  doctrines,  insisting 
upon  the  teaching  of  the  Lambeth  Articles  and  the 
insufficiency  of  the  Thirty-nine  on  Predestination 
and  the  like.  Then  they  objected  to  the  reading  of 
the  Apocrypha  and  to  the  rigidity  of  subscription.  In 
regard  to  Church  government  they  took  a  line  which 
brought  down  the  wrath  of  his  Majesty  upon  them. 
**  If  you  aim  at  a  Scotch  Presbytery,"  he  exclaimed, 
*'it  agreeth  as  well  with  monarchy  as  God  and  the 
devil.  Then  Jack  and  Tom  and  Will  and  Dick  will 
meet  and  censure  me  and  my  council."  As  regards 
ritual,  they  objected  to  the  cross  in  baptism,  to  the 
surplice,  to  certain  ceremonies  in  the  marriage  serv- 
ice, for  example,  the  giving  of  a  ring,  and  to  the 
churching  of  women.  All  resented  the  objection  to 
the  cross,  the  King  declaring  that  he  would  not 
tolerate  such  weak  brethren.  When  one  of  the 
Puritans  spoke  of  the  surplice  being  a  garment  worn 
by  the  priests  of  Isis,  the  King  retorted  that  he  had 
been  accustomed  to  hear  it  spoken  of  as  "  a  rag  of 
Popery."  On  the  whole,  there  is  little  doubt  of  the 
truth  of  Neal's  statement  that  the  "  Puritan  minis- 
ters were  insulted,  ridiculed,  and  laughed  to  scorn, 


368  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

without  either  wit  or  good  manners."  Even  if  to  us 
many  of  the  Puritan  objections  may  seem  absurd, 
and  have  been  given  up  by  their  successors,  yet  they 
had  been  promised  a  hearing,  and  they  ought  to  have 
got  what  they  were  promised. 

On  the  third  day,  Wednesday  (January  18),  the 
Archbishop  and  committee  presented  their  report, 
suggesting  the  alterations  already  noticed.  They 
were  ver}'^  few;  and  the  Puritans,  who  had  been  flat- 
tering themselves  that  they  had  the  best  of  the  argu- 
ments, were  told  by  the  King  that  the  exceptions 
taken  were  matters  of  weakness.  Dr.  Reynolds  he 
counselled  to  obedience  and  humility,  such  as  he  ex- 
pected from  honest  and  good  men  ;  and  Reynolds 
afterwards  conformed.  In  answer  to  intercessions 
on  behalf  of  some  ministers  in  Lancashire  and  Suf- 
folk, the  King  gave  for  answer :  "  Let  them  conform 
themselves,  or  they  shall  hear  of  it."  Commissioners 
were  appointed  to  give  effect  to  the  changes  agreed 
upon ;  and  they  were  published  in  letters  patent,  by 
whicli  the  exclusive  use  of  the  revised  Prayer  Book 
was  ordered. 

The  changes  made  by  the  conference  were  pro- 
mulgated by  the  King  under  the  clause  in  Eliza- 
beth's Act  of  Uniformity  which  empowered  the 
sovereign,  with  the  advice  of  the  Ecclesiastical  Com- 
missioners, to  ordain  further  ceremonies,  if  the  orders 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  should  be  misused. 
These  alterations,  however,  had  also  the  sanction  of 
Convocation,  inasmuch  as  that  body  ordered  the 
revised  book  to  be  provided  for  the  use  of  parish 
churches. 


Chanrjes  in  Prayer  Book.  861^ 

The  changes  made  were  (1)  the  removal  of 
several  Apocryphal  first  lessons  and  the  substitution 
of  others  from  the  canonical  Scriptures ;  (2)  the 
introduction,  already  mentioned,  of  the  phrase  "or 
remission  of  sins,"  into  the  title  of  the  general 
absolution  ;•  (3)  a  prayer  for  the  Queen,  the  Prince 
and  other  children  of  the  King,  introduced  after  the 
prayer  for  the  King ;  and  a  corresponding  petition  in 
the  litany;  (4)  thanksgiving  for  particular  oc- 
casions; for  rain,  for  fair  weather,  for  plenty^  for 
peace  and  victory,  and  for  deliverance  from  the 
plague.  The  chief  alteration  was  made  in  the 
rubrics  of  the  oflBce  for  private  baptism,  restricting 
the  administration  to  the  minister  of  the  parish  or 
some  other  lawful  minister.  The  concluding  portion 
of  the  catechism,  on  the  sacraments,  written  by  Dean 
Overall,  was  now  added. 

Whitgift  was  now  seventy-three  years  of  age,  and 
soon  after  the  Hampton  Court  Conference,  he  took 
cold  in  his  barge  on  the  Thames,  and  other  compli* 
cations  ensued.  He  was  stricken  with  paralysis, 
and,  when  the  King  went  to  see  him,  he  attempted 
to  converse  with  him  in  Latin.  All  that  could  be 
caught  of  his  utterances  were  the  words :  "  Pro 
Ecclesia  Dei."  He  died  February  20,  1604.  Whit- 
gift was  a  man  of  high  principle,  simple-njinded, 
sincere,  and  disinterested.  He  was  loyal  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Church  of  England  and  courted  favor 
neither  with  the  powerful  nor  with  the  multitude. 
Those  who  have  ventured  to  condemn  him  for  his 
strictness  would  have  been  the  first  to  find  fault 
with  him  for  inconsistency,  if  he  had  acted  diflfer- 
X 


''    s^  .rrfr^/^^, 


370  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ently.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  Church  of 
England  owes  him  a  great  debt  of  gratitude ;  and 
those  who  value  the  constitution  of  that  Church  will 
regard  Whitgift  as  one  of  the  foremost  of  those 
who  have  labored  wisely  and  self-deny  in  gly  for  the 
maintenance  of  her  principles.  It  should  be  added 
that  the  sermons  which  Whitgift  left,  although  now 
seldom  read,  do  not  deserve  the  neglect  into  which 
they  have  fallen,  being,  both  in  matter  and  in  form, 
eminently  worthy  of  study. 

During  the  vacancy  of  the  Primacy,  the  Con- 
vocation of  Canterbury  met,  March  20,  1604,  under 
the  presidency  of  Bancroft,  Bishop  of  London.  At  the 
fifth  session  (April  13)  the  King's  licence  to  make 
canons  was  shown.  On  May  18,  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles  were  again  approved  and  subscribed.  In 
the  eleventh  session  Bancroft  brought  in  a  book  of 
canons,  consisting  of  various  articles,  injunctions, 
and  synodal  acts  passed  in  the  reigns  of  Edward  VI, 
and  Elizabeth,  and  placed  the  book  in  the  hands  of 
the  Prolocutor  of  the  Lower  House.  Before  these 
canons  were  adopted  a  discussion  arose  with  the  Pu- 
ritans on  the  use  of  the  cross  in  baptism,  the  effect 
of  which  will  be  seen  in  the  thirtieth  canon.  The 
rest  of  the  canons  seem  to  have  passed  without  much 
opposition.  These  canons  do  not  touch  the  laity  ex- 
cept so  far  as  they  represent  earlier  parliamentary 
legislation,  or  have  subsequently  received  legislative 
sanction;  but  they  certainly  bind  the  Clergy,  and 
may  be  enforced  by  ecclesiastical  penalties. 

It  is  of  importance  to  understand  the  general 
effect  of  these  canons,  and  therefore  we  will  here 


The    Canons.  371 


give  their  principal  contents.  They  are  one  hundred 
and  sixty-one  in  number,  and  are  divided  into 
thirteen  chapters.  The  first  chapter  declares  that 
whoever  should  maintain  that  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land was  not  a  true  and  apostolical  church,  should 
be  ipso  facto  excommunicated,  and  not  be  restored 
until  he  had  made  a  public  revocation  of  his  wicked 
error.  Chapter  II.,  on  Divine  Worship,  in  like 
manner,  condemned  those  who  disparaged  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer.  Due  reverence  is  required 
during  divine  service.  At  the  name  of  Jesus  lowly 
reverence  is  to  be  made.  Holy  communion  is  to 
be  received  three  times  a  year  at  least;  and  in  all 
cathedral  and  collegiate  churches,  on  the  principal 
feast  days,  the  celebrant  is  to  use  a  decent  cope,  and 
to  be  assisted  by  a  Gospeller  and  Epistoirr  agree- 
ably, according  to  the  advertisements  published  in 
the  seventh  year  of  Elizabeth. 

When  these  canons  were  passed  by  the  Synod  of 
Canterbury,  the  King,  by  letters  patent,  made  tliem 
binding  upon  the  whole  kingdom.  This  seemed  to 
the  Convocation  of  York  an  infringement  of  their 
independence ;  so  that  they  petitioned  to  be  allowed 
to  make  canons  for  themselves ;  and,  this  permission 
having  been  obtained,  they  adopted  the  canons  pre- 
vioudy  passed  by  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury. 
On  July  16  a  proclamation  went  forth,  warning  all 
to  be  ready  to  conform  before  the  last  day  of  No- 
vember, or  to  take  the  consequences. 

On  the  9th  of  October,  1604,  Bancroft  was  nomi- 
nated to  the  primacy  and  on  the  15th  of  December 
he  was  con  firmed  in  Lambeth  Church.    It  is  believed 


372  .    The  Anylican  Reformation. 

that  he  was  chosen  in  pursuance  of  the  resolve  now 
formed  to  apply  the  ecclesiastical  law  more  strictly. 
Bancroft  was  born  in  Lancashire  in  1544,  the  son  of 
a  gentleman  of  private  means.  He  was  educated  at 
Cambridge,  but  was  not  made  a  fellow  of  his  college, 
although  he  became  eminent  as  a  tutor.  Soon  after 
his  ordination  he  became  chaplain  to  Bishop  Cox  of 
Ely ;  and  on  account  of  his  reputation  for  eloquence, 
he  was  made  University  preacher  in  1676.  In  1584 
he  was  made  rector  of  St.  Andrew's,  Holborn,  and 
in  the  following  year  he  took  his  degree  of  D.  D., 
and  was  made  treasurer  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral  by 
the  Queen.  His  promotions  now  became  rapid.  In 
1589  he  was  made  a  Prebendary  of  St.  Paul's,  in 
1592,  Canon  of  Westminster  Abbey,  and  in  1594 
Canon  of  Canterbury.  Bancroft  showed  himself  an 
adversary  of  the  Puritans,  especially  in  a  sermon 
preached  at  Paul's  Cross,  which  attracted  a  great 
deal  of  attention.  It  was  in  this  sermon  that  he  set 
forth  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  right  of  episcopacy, 
as  already  mentioned.  Bancroft  was  recommended 
by  Whitgift  to  the  Queen ;  but  it  was  sometime  be- 
fore his  conspicuous  merits  received  adequate  recog- 
nition. At  last,  in  1597,  through  the  influence  of 
Whitgift  and  Cecil,  he  was  nominated  to  the  See  of 
London;  and  in  1604  he  succeeded  Whitgift  as 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

It  was  not  long  before  Bancroft  began  to  show 
that  more  vigorous  methods  were  to  be  taken  with 
recusants.  It  is  believed  that  he  stirred  up  the 
Council  to  intimate  to  the  archbishops  that,  where 
advice  and  admonition  were  ineffectual,  obedience 


Bancrofts  Severity.  873 

should  be  compelled.  On  the  22d  of  December, 
copies  of  this  letter  were  forwarded  to  all  the  suf- 
fragans of  Canterbury.  In  carrjing  out  the  com- 
mands of  the  Council  they  were  to  follow  that  which 
was  enjoined  in  the  thirty-sixth  and  thirty-seventh 
canons  of  the  last  Convocation. 

By  these  canons  it  is  required  that  no  one  shall 
be  allowed  to  hold  a  living  or  preach  or  catechise 
without  a  licence  from  a  bishop  or  one  of  the  Uni- 
versities ;  and  then  only  on  condition  of  signing 
Whitgift's  three  articles.  But,  beyond  the  signature 
required  up  to  this  time,  every  one  subscribing  these 
articles  had  to  set  down  both  his  Christian  and  sur- 
name, and  declare  that  he  did  "willingly  and 
ex  animo  subscribe  to  these  three  articles."  Without 
discussing  the  question  how  far,  in  the  circumstances 
of  the  time,  such  a  measure  might  be  justified,  we 
must  admit  that  there  was  a  hardship  in  pressing 
tender  consciences  too  far;  and  some  of  the  men 
who  have  been  the  soundest  in  their  allegiance  to 
the  English  Church  have  condemned  these  measures 
as  harsh  and  mischievous.  Not  only  were  many  of 
the  Puritans  driven  into  nonconformity  and  exile ; 
but  many  laymen  were  alienated  from  the  estab- 
lished form  of  religion.  At  the  same  time  there  was 
a  widespread  appearance  of  conformity ;  and  some 
liave  thought  that,  if  Bancroft  had  lived  longer  "he 
would  quickly  have  extinguished  all  that  fire  in 
England  which  had  been  kindled  at  Geneva." 

There  may,  however,  be  some  doubt  as  to  whether 
Bancroft's  action  was  altogether  defensible,  since  he 
came  into  collision  with  the  common  law  courts,  the 


874  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

judges  of  which  granted  prohibitions,  by  which  the 
cases  were  removed  from  the  ecclesiastical  courts  to 
be  tried  by  the  common  law  of  the  land.  It  is  un- 
necessary to  go  into  details  further  than  to  say  that 
the  bishops  protested  and  the  matter  was  brouglit 
before  the  King.  The  Archbishop  argued  that,  since 
the  judges  were  the  King's  delegates,  his  Majesty 
had  the  power  of  taking  any  case  out  of  their  hands. 
Sir  Edward  Coke,  the  Chief  Justice,  on  the  contrary, 
maintained  that  the  common  law  judges  alone  had 
the  power  of  interpreting  the  law,  and  that  the  ec- 
clesiastical courts  had  no  right  to  fine  or  imprison 
except  for  heresy.  The  King  was  not  able  to  settle 
the  dispute,  and  exhorted  them  to  live  in  peace.  It 
can  easily  be  understood  that  these  disagreements 
increased  the  jealousy  of  the  laity,  ever  watchful 
against  the  encroachments  of  the  ecclesiastics ;  and 
the  fact  that  the  Clergy  seemed  always  ready  to  sup- 
port the  King  in  his  absolutist  tendencies,  and  that 
they  seemed  able  to  count  upon  royal  support  of 
their  own  aggressions,  produced  a  state  of  feeling  in 
Parliament  and  among  the  laity  which  resulted  in 
the  antagonism  of  the  nation  at  large  to  the  King's 
unfortunate  son,  Charles  I. 

Only  a  brief  notice  need  here  be  given  to  the 
serious  incident  known  as  the  "  Gunpowder  Plot."  It 
is  impossible  either  to  charge  Roman  Catholics  in 
general  with  this  conspiracy,  or  to  acquit  particular 
members  of  their  body  of  the  attempt  to  destroy  the 
King  and  his  two  sons.  The  author  of  this  attempt 
was  Robert  Catesbj'^,  a  Roman  Catholic  gentleman 
who  had  suffered  persecution.     The  agent  selected 


Gunpowder  Plot.  875 


■was  a  soldier  named  Guy  Fawkes.  It  is  well  known 
that  the  anxiety  of  one  of  the  conspirators  to  save 
the  life  of  a  friend  led  to  the  discovery  of  the  plot. 
Guy  Fawkes  was  taken  just  as  he  was  about  to  fire 
the  train.  The  conspirators  who  were  taken  were 
executed;  and  the  only  result  was  an  increased 
ardor  in  the  persecution  of  Roman  Catholics. 

One  of  the  most  important  works  accomplished 
during  the  primacy  was  the  revision  of  the  English 
Bible  which  resulted  in  the  authorized  version,  not 
published,  however,  until  the  year  after  Bancroft's 
death.  During  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth  two  versions  of  the  Bible  were  in  common 
use,  the  Genevan  Bible,  produced  under  the  in- 
fluence of  Calvin  ;  and  the  Bishops'  Bible,  under  tlie 
superintendence  of  Archbishop  Parker.  The  Ge- 
nevan New  Testament  was  published  in  1557,  and 
the  whole  Bible  in  1560,  dedicated  to  Queen  Eliza- 
beth. The  book  became  popular  at  once,  both  on 
account  of  its  convenient  size,  so  much  more  handy 
than  the  Great  Bible ;  and  because  of  the  improved 
character  of  the  translation.  The  Calvinistic  bias  by 
wliich  it  is  distinguished  probably  increased  its 
popularity.  The  Bishops'  Bible  was  undertaken  by 
Parker,  in  order  to  provide  a  version  better  suited 
to  the  needs  of  English  Churchmen.  After  sur- 
mounting many  difficulties  the  Bishops'  Bible  was 
published  in  1568  in  a  handsome  folio.  The  names 
of  the  revisers  are  not  certainly  known  ;  for  although 
initials  are  added  at  the  end  of  some  of  the  books, 
some  names  are  known  to  be  omitted.  Among 
those  who  are  known,  eight  were  bishops,  including 


876  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


Sandys,  Guest,  Cox,  and  others ;  whence  the  book 
derived  its  name.  Parker  asked  for  the  royal  sanc- 
tion on  the  ground  tliat,  whilst  the  Genevan  version 
was  unsatisfactory,  the  accuracy  of  the  Great  Bible 
could  not  be  maintained.  Whether  the  Queen  gave 
any  reply  to  this  application  we  cannot  tell ;  but  at 
least  the  new  translation  was  sanctioned  by  Convo- 
cation. By  degrees  the  Great  Bible  fell  out  of  use, 
and  the  Bishops'  Bible  and  the  Genevan  both  held 
their  place  in  the  public  services.  It  should  be 
added  that  the  Roman  Catholic  version  appeared 
soon  afterwards,  the  Rheiins  New  Testament  being 
published  in  1682,  and  the  Douai  Old  Testament 
in  1609. 

The  subject  of  a  new  translation  of  the  Bible  was 
brought  up  at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference ;  and 
the  King,  as  we  are  informed  by  Bancroft,  "  wished 
some  special  pains  should  be  taken  "  for  one  uniform 
translation,  and  "he  gave  this  caveat,  upon  a  word 
cast  out  by  my  Lord  of  London,  that  no  marginal 
notes  sliould  be  added,  having  found  in  them  which 
are  annexed  to  the  Geneva  translation.  .  .  some 
notes  very  partial,  untrue,  seditious,  and  savoring  too 
much  of  traitorous  and  dangerous  conceits." 

On  the  22d  of  July  (1604)  the  King  wrote  to 
Bancroft,  not  yet  translated  to  the  See  of  Canter- 
bury which  was  then  vacant,  saying  that  he  had  "  ap- 
pointed certain  learned  men  to  the  number  of  four 
and  fifty,  for  the  translating  of  the  Bible,"  asking 
him  to  recompense  the  translators  by  Church  prefer- 
ment, and  giving  instructions  for  the  carrying  out  of 
the  work.    The  preliminaries  were  arranged  in  this 


Revision  of  English  Bible.  877 

year ;  but  the  work  of  revision  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  seriously  begun  until  1607.  Forty-seven 
revisers  are  named.  Among  tliose  who  took  part  in 
it  mention  may  be  made  of  Andrewes,  Dean  of  West- 
minster, afterwards  Bishop  of  Winchester ;  Overall, 
Dean  of  St.  Paul's ;  Reynolds,  President  of  Corpus 
Christi  College ;  Savile,  Provost  of  Eton ;  whilst 
others  of  less  repute  were  also  men  of  learning  and 
distinction. 

The  revisers  were  the  men  of  that  time  who  were 
the  best  fitted  for  the  work ;  but  they  were  required 
to  act  under  certain  rules  prescribed  for  their  guid- 
ance. Thus  they  were  instructed  to  follow  the 
Bishops'  Bible  which  was  to  be  "  as  little  altered  as 
the  truth  of  the  original  will  permit."  The  old  ec- 
clesiastical words  were  to  be  kept,  e.  g.,  the  word 
"  Church  "  instead  of  "  Congregation  "  (as  in  the 
Geneva  Bible).  No  marginal  notes  were  to  be  af- 
fixed, except  for  the  explanation  of  Hebrew  or  Greek 
words.  When  a  company  had  finished  a  book,  they 
were  required  to  "  send  it  to  the  rest  to  be  consid- 
ered of  seriously  and  judiciously,  for  his  Majesty  is 
very  careful  in  this  point."  There  were  fifteen  rules 
in  all :  these  are  the  most  important,  and  may  serve 
as  samples  of  the  whole. 

In  the  preface  to  the  new  translation,  now  not 
often  printed  in  our  Bibles,  Dr.  Miles  Smith,  after- 
wards Bishop  of  Gloucester,  representing  the  body 
of  translators,  declares :  "  The  work  hath  not  been 
huddled  up  in  seventy-two  days  [like  the  Septua- 
gint],  but  hath  cost  the  workmen,  as  light  as  it 
seemeth,  the  pains  of  twice  seven  times  seventy-two 


878  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

days  and  more.  .  .  We  were  so  far  off  from  con- 
demning any  of  their  labors  that  travailed  before 
in  this  kind,  either  in  this  land  or  beyond  sea,  .  .  . 
that  we  acknowledge  them  to  have  been  raised  up  of 
God,  for  the  building  and  furnishing  of  His  Church, 
and  that  they  deserve  to  be  had  of  us  and  of  pos- 
terity in  everlasting  remembrance."  Still  he  goes 
on,  it  is  well  that  the  earlier  versions  should  be  sub- 
jected to  further  consideration,  since  by  this  means 
**  it  cometh  to  pass  that  whatsoever  is  sound  already 
,  .  .  the  same  will  shine  as  gold,  more  brightlj^  being 
rubbed  and  polished ;  also  if  any  thing  be  halting  or 
superfluous  or  not  so  agreeable  to  the  original,  the 
same  may  be  corrected  and  the  truth  set  in  place." 
Speaking  of  the  revisers,  he  says,  "  there  were  many 
chosen  that  were  greater  in  other  men's  eyes  than  in 
their  own,  and  that  sought  the  truth  rather  than 
their  own  praise.  .  .  .  Neither  did  we  disdaia  to 
revise  that  which  we  had  done,  and  to  bring  batik  to 
the  anvil  that  which  we  had  hammered ;  but  having 
and  using  as  great  helps  as  were  needful,  and  fearing 
no  reproach  for  slowness,  nor  coveting  praise  for  ex- 
pedition, we  have  at  the  length,  through  the  good 
hand  of  the  Lord  upon  us,  brought  the  work  to  that 
pass  that  you  see." 

The  revised  version  rppeared  in  1611  and  won  its 
way  to  public  favor  very  slowly.  The  same  kind  of 
attack  was  made  upon  it  as  that  with  which  we  are 
familiar  in  the  case  of  the  revised  version  of  our  own 
day,  the  revisers  being  accused  of  defective  scholar- 
ship, of  unnecessary  alterations  from  the  earlier 
translations,  and  even  of  false  doctrine.     "  It  was 


The  Authorized   Version.  379 

not  till  about  the  middle  of  the  century  that  [the 
Geneva  Bible]  was  formally  displaced.  And  thus, 
lit  the  very  time  when  the  monarchy  and  the  Church 
were,  as  it  seemed,  finally  overthrown,  the  English 
people,  by  their  silent  and  unanimous  acceptance  of 
the  new  Bible  gave  a  spontaneous  testimony  to  the 
principles  of  order  and  catholicity  of  which  both 
were  an  embodiment."  ^  Of  the  greatness  of  the 
work  thus  accomplished  it  is  unnecessary  to  speak. 
Whether  we  consider  the  simple  dignity  of  the  dic- 
tion, or  the  improvements  made  in  the  renderings  of 
the  original  documents,  or  the  influence  exerted  upon 
the  subsequent  history  of  the  English  language,  the 
authorized  version  of  1611  will  always  be  an  object 
of  wonder  and  delight.  It  is  only  when  finality  is 
claimed  for  it,  and  the  researches  of  scholars  for 
nearly  three  centuries  are  set  at  nought,  that  a  pro- 
test against  contentions  so  preposterous  becomes  a 
duty  in  the  interest  of  truth.  It  should  be  added 
that  there  is  no  evidence  of  the  version  of  1611  hav- 
ing been  authorized  by  King  or  Parliament  or  Con- 
vocation ;  so  that  it  gained  its  place  of  preeminence 
and  exclusive  right  on  the  mere  strength  of  its  merits. 
Another  incident  of  no  small  importance,  which 
took  place  under  the  primacy  of  Bancroft,  was  the 
reintroduction  of  episcopacy  into  Scotland,  a  change 
which  has  been  commonly,  but  improperly,  attributed 
to  Laud.  It  was  James  himself  who  resolved  to 
turn  the  pseudo-episcopal  Scottish  system  into  a  re- 

•  Bp.  Westcott :  "History  of  the  English  Bible,"  a  work  to 
which  the  reader  may  be  confidently  referred  for  farther  details 
on  the  subject  of  the  English  Versions. 


380  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ality.  The  Scottish  reformation  had  been  made  on 
the  Swiss  model,  Calvinistic  and  Presbyterian.  In 
1572  the  nobles  obtained  the  appointment  of  nominal 
bishops,  known  as  the  Tulchan^  bishops,  who  re- 
ceived the  incomes  of  their  sees,  and  handed  them 
over  to  their  patrons.  At  the  same  time  that  these 
so-called  bishops  presided  over  their  dioceses,  the 
Presbyterians  held  their  own  assemblies,  so  that  the 
King  was  called  to  arbitrate  between  them.  In 
1592  he  reluctantly  gave  his  consent  to  the  reestab- 
lishment  of  the  Presbyterian  system.  But  he  soon 
repented.  We  have  heard  his  utterance  on  Presby- 
terianism  at  the  Hampton  Court  Conference;  and 
we  cannot  greatly  wonder  at  his  feelings,  when  we 
remember  the  liberties  taken  with  his  Majesty  by 
some  of  the  Presbyterian  leaders.  Tliey  not  only 
criticised  his  actions  from  the  pulpit ;  but  one  of 
them  plucked  him  by  the  sleeve,  and  called  him, 
"  God's  silly  vassal."  Bishops  were  reappointed  in 
1599. 

But  it  was  in  1610  that  a  more  serious  step  was 
taken  by  the  consecration  of  Spotswood  to  Glasgow, 
Lamb  to  Brechin,  and  Hamilton  to  Galloway.  In 
order  to  avoid  offence  to  the  Scottish  Clergy,  neither 
of  the  English  arclibishops  took  part  in  tlie  consecra- 
tion which  was  effected  in  the  chapel  of  London 
House,  October  21,  1610,  by  the  bishops  of  London, 
Ely,  Rochester,  and  Worcester.  Undoubtedly  tliis 
was  chiefly  the  work  of  James  himself  who  held  the 


I 


•Tulchan  was  the  Scotch  nnme  for  a  calfs  skin,  staffed  with 
Bfraw,  which  wns  set  up  by  the  side  of  a  cow,  so  tliat  she  might 
give  her  milk  more  freely. 


Episcopacy  in  Scotland.  381 

theory,  "No  bishop,  no  King;"  but  although  he  was 
resolved  on  this  point,  he  knew  his  fellow-country- 
men too  well  to  insist  upon  the  immediate  introduc- 
tion of  the  Anglican  Prayer  Book  into  the  churches. 
When  he  was  asked  by  Laud  to  draw  his  Scottish  sub- 
jects "to a  nearer  conjunction  with  the  liturgy  and  can- 
ons of  this  nation,"  the  King  said:  "I  sent  him  back 
with  the  frivolous  draft  he  had  drawn.  For  all  that 
he  feared  not  my  anger,  but  assaulted  me  again  with 
another  ill-fangled  platform  to  make  that  stubborn 
Kirk  stoop  more  to  the  English  platform ;  but  I  durst 
not  play  fast  and  loose  with  my  word.  He  knows 
not  the  stomach  of  that  people."  What  happened  in 
this  matter  at  a  later  period  we  shall  see  in  due  course. 

Shortl}  after  the  consecration  of  the  Scottish  bish- 
ops Bancroft  was  taken  ill,  and  died  November  2, 
1610,  after  being  six  years  Archbishop.  The 
strength  and  weakness  of  his  administration  will 
be  judged  differently  by  different  men.  On  the  one 
hand  his  work  has  been  denounced  as  inquisitorial; 
on  the  other  hand  it  has  been  urged  that  his  severity 
was  exhibited  only  towards  those  who  had  solemnly 
engaged  to  observe  the  laws  of  the  Church,  and  were 
doing  their  utmost  to  evade  their  engagements.  It 
has  also  been  said  that  his  plans  did  not  succeed,  and 
that  he  probably  left  the  Church  of  England  weaker 
than  he  found  it;  but  it  may  not  unfairly  be  urged 
in  reply  that  he  had  scarcely  time  to  give  effect  to 
his  measures. 

Two  things  have  been  charged  against  him  which 
do  not  seem  capable  of  proof,  a  too  great  severity  in 
the  High  Commission  Court  and  a  spirit  of  parai- 


882  The  Anylican  Reformation, 

mony.  But  Bishop  Hackett  declares  that,  although 
he  would  chide  stoutly,  he  would  censure  mildly; 
that  he  sat  in  the  court  rather  as  a  father  than  as  a 
judge;  and  that  he  regarded  a  pastoral  staff  as  being 
made  to  bring  back  a  wandering  sheep,  not  to  knock 
it  down.  As  regards  the  charge  of  covetousness,  it 
would  appear  tliat  the  Archbishop  was  parsimonious 
to  no  one  but  himself.  He  did  not  keep  up  the  same 
state  as  his  predecessors,  but  he  left  no  more  than 
six  thousand  pounds  behind  him ;  and  he  was  always 
ready  to  help  the  needy. 


\ 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 

ARCHBISHOP  ABBOT  AND  CALVINISM. 

HEN  Bancroft  died,  it  was  hoped  by  many 
that  he  would  be  succeeded  by  Andrewes 
whose  claims  were  supported  by  Prince 
Charles  and  the  Duke  of  Buckingham. 
He  was  also  a  favorite  of  the  King,  who  had  made 
him  Bishop  of  Chichester  (1605)  and  of  Ely  (1609). 
But  there  were  several  reasons  for  the  selection  of 
Abbot.  In  the  first  place,  he  had  been  employed  in 
arranging  the  restoration  of  bishops  to  the  Scottish 
Church  and  had  conducted  that  work  with  success; 
and  he  was  chaplain  to  the  Earl  of  Dunbar,  who  was 
a  favorite  of  the  King.  Moreover,  he  had  written  a 
preface  to  a  book  on  the  Gowrie  conspiracy,  in 
which  he  had  spoken  of  the  King  as  being  "zealous 
as  David,  learned  as  Solomon,  religious  as  Josias, 
careful  of  spreading  the  truth  as  Constan tine,  just  as 
Moses,  undefiled  as  Jehoshaphat  or  Hezekia,  clement 
as  Theodosius."  Fro  n  what  we  know  of  James,  we 
should  suppose  he  would  find  it  difficult  to  withstand 
such  arguments.  In  any  case  he  made  Abbot  Arch- 
bishop. 

Abbot  was  born  at  Guildford,  in  1562,  took  his  de- 
gree at  Oxford,  from  Balliol  college,  in  1582,  and  be- 
came a  fellow.  In  1585  he  received  holy  orders  and 
soon  acquired  a  great  reputation  as  a  preacher.     In 

383 


^>:./  . 


884  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

1597  he  became  D.  D.,  and  was  elected  Master  of 
University  College.  In  1599  he  was  made  Dean 
of  Winchester.  In  1608  he  became  chaplain  to 
the  Earl  of  Dunbar,  treasurer  of  Scotland.  He  was 
made  Bishop  of  Coventry  and  Lichfield  in  1609,  and 
of  London  in  1610.  Abbot  was  a  man  of  ability  and 
sincerely  religious,  but  he  was  intolerant  and  narrow- 
minded.  He  had  been  one  of  the  great  upholders  of 
Puritanism  in  Oxford,  having  learned  his  theology 
from  the  foreign  reformers ;  and  he  became  engaged 
in  controversy  with  Laud  on  the  subjects  of  Arminian- 
ism,  baptismal  regeneration,  and  apostolical  succes- 
sion. In  March  1611,  he  was  nominated  to  Canter- 
bury. 

The  appointment  can  hardly  be  regarded  as  other 
than  unfortunate.  It  was  acceptable  to  neither 
party  ui  the  Church  at  the  time,  and  his  adminis- 
tration was  in  no  way  advantageous  to  the  Church. 
The  King,  from  his  friendship  with  the  Prince  of 
Orange,  hud  become  favorable  to  the  Calvinists  and 
opposed  to  the  Remonstrants  or  Arminians ;  and 
Henry,  Prince  of  Wales  was  on  the  same  side.  He 
was  spoken  of  as  the  *'  darling  of  the  Puritans,"  and 
he  had  declared  that,  when  he  came  to  the  throne, 
he  would  take  means  of  reconciling  the  Puritans  to 
the  Church ;  but  his  early  death  put  an  end  to  their 
hopes  (November  6,  1612). 

Under  the  influence  of  Abbot  religious  persecu- 
tion was  revived  in  a  very  hideous  form.  During 
the  reign  of  Elizabeth  a  good  many  had  been  put  to 
death,  but  none  for  forty  years  simply  on  the  ground 
of  heresy,  but  because  they  were  guilty  of  treason. 


Trials  for  Heresy.  885 

But  now  the  fires  of  Smitl^ifield  were  lighted  again 
for  the  burning  of  heretics.  The  first  to  suffer  was 
Bartholomew  Legget,  an  Essex  man,  about  forty 
years  of  age.  This  man  had  imbibed  Arian  opinions 
and  was  well  read  in  the  Scriptures  and  full  of  con- 
fidence in  the  opinions  which  ho  professed  to  have 
discovered  in  them.  He  was  cited  before  the  King 
who,  proud  of  his  learning  as  a  theologian,  took  in 
hand  to  convince  him  of  his  errors.  But,  instead  of 
yielding  to  his  royal  antagonist,  he  is  said  to  have 
behaved  with  the  greatest  audacity,  so  that  the  King, 
in  his  anger,  actually  spurned  him  with  his  foot. 
He  was  then  sent  for  trial  to  the  Consistorial  Court, 
where  he  was  equally  defiant,  denying  the  authority 
of  the  court,  and  treating  the  judges  with  contempt. 
The  court  declared  the  accused  to  be  worthy  of 
death  ;  but  they  had  no  power  to  sentence  him,  and, 
when  he  was  brought  before  the  civil  court,  care  was 
taken  to  select  judges  who  w^ould  condemn  the 
heretic  to  death.  It  is  shocking  to  add  that  Abbot 
was  one  of  the  foremost  in  getting  the  unfortunate 
man  sentenced.  Writing  to  the  Lord  Chancellor, 
he  tells  him  that  his  Majesty's  pleasure  was  that 
"  your  Lordship  should  call  unto  you  three  or  four 
of  the  judges  and  take  their  resolution  concerning 
the  force  of  law  in  that  behalf,  that  so  with  expedi- 
tion these  evil  persons  may  receive  the  recompense 
of  their  pride  and  impiety.  .  .  And,  as  I  con- 
ceived, his  Highness  did  not  much  desire  that  Lord 
Coke  should  be  called  thereunto,  lest  by  his  singular- 
ity in  opinion  he  should  give  stay  to  the  business." 
Coke  had  not  much  taste  for  giving  effect  to  the 


386  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

sentences  of  ecclesiastical  courts ;  and  it  would  be 
well  that  he  should  not  be  allowed  to  meddle  I 
Bartholomew  Legget  was  burned  in  Smithfield, 
March  18,  1612. 

A  second  hei^^tic  who  suffered  the  same  penalty- 
was  Edward  \vightman,  who  was  burned  at  Lich- 
field soon  after,  April  11.  But  public  horror  and 
indignation  were  stirred  at  the  "novelty  and  hideous- 
ness  of  the  punishment ; "  and  the  King  resolved 
that,  in  the  case  of  any  others  condemned  to  death, 
they  should  be  allowed  to  waste  away  in  prison. 

So  long  as  the  Archbishop  seconded  the  wishes  of 
the  King,  the  court  was  ready  to  favor  him  ;  but 
narrow  and  one-sided  as  Abbot  was,  he  was  also  high- 
minded  and  conscientious ;  and  this  was  shown  in 
two  remarkable  cases.  The  first  was  the  case  of 
the  attempted  alienation  of  the  bequest  of  Thomas 
Sutton  of  Knaith  in  Lincolnshire,  for  the  founding  of 
the  Charter  House.  Abbot's  protest  was  successful, 
and. with  equal  modesty  and  wisdom  he  gave  the 
credit  to  the  King. 

The  other  was  the  divorce  of  the  Countess  of 
Essex,  in  order  to  permit  of  her  union  with  James's 
favorite,  Robert  Carr,  Earl  of  Somerset.  A  court 
was  formed,  consisting  of  four  bishops  and  five  civil- 
ians. The  Archbishop  and  Bishop  King  of  London 
were  on  the  commission,  and  entreated  the  King  not 
to  persevere  in  his  purpose.  Such  an  appeal  was 
vain.  The  two  bishops  nobly  held  out ;  but  James 
issued  a  new  commission  and  obtained  the  divorce, 
the  tragic  consequences  of  which  probably  convinced 
the  King  of  the  wrong  he  had  done. 


'  ;  r i.\'1"  ».: ■ 


Booh  of  Sports.  387 


Throughout  his  whole  reign  James  maintained  liis 
royal  supremacy  over  the  law  itself;  and  any  one 
who  resisted  his  arbitrary  authority  had  to  yield  or 
to  suffer.  On  one  occasion  he  summoned  the  judges 
and  informed  them  that  they  must  abstain  from  try- 
ing any  case  in  which  the  prerogative  of  the  crown 
was  involved.  All  the  judges  promised  obedience, 
except  the  Lord  Chief  Justice,  Sir  Edward  Coke, 
who  declared  that  whatever  case  might  come  before 
him  should  be  dealt  with  according  to  law.  In  con- 
sequence he  was  first  suspended  and  afterwards  dis- 
missed. 

In  the  year  1618  the  King  published  his  famous 
**  Book  of  Sports "  in  which  he  enjoined  certain 
amusements  as  suited  for  Sunday  afternoons,  namely, 
dancing,  archery,  leaping,  vaulting,  May-games, 
Morris-dances,  and  the  like.  It  is  said  that  the  pub- 
lication of  this  book  was  occasioned  by  the  incon- 
venient strictness  of  Puritan  Sabbatarianism  which  he 
liad  met  with  in  a  progress  through  Lancashire. 
The  book  produced  a  very  painful  sensation  among 
the  Puritans;  and  the  Archbishop  forbade  the  read- 
ing of  the  King's  letter  in  his  Church  at  Croydon. 
But  Mr.  Trask,  a  Puritan  minister,  went  further,  and 
in  reply,  wrote  a  book  upholding  the  strictest  Sab- 
batarian observances.  For  this  offence  he  was  set  in 
the  pillory  at  Westminster,  then  whipped  to  the 
Fleet,  and  there  confined  during  his  Majesty's  pleas- 
ure. 

King  James's  passion  for  theology  and  Calvinism 
induced  him  to  send  deputies  to  the  Synod  of  Dort, 
(1618),  one   of  those   sent  being  a  man  so  distin- 


388  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

guished  as  Dr.  Joseph  Hall,  then  Dean  of  Worcester, 
who  preached  the  sermon  at  the  opening  of  tlie  as- 
sembly and  received  a  gold  medal  from  the  synod 
in  token  of  respect.  Bnt  James's  zeal  for  Calvinism 
began  to  abate.  He  was  now  contemplating  a  mar- 
riage between  Prince  Charles  and  the  Infanta  of 
Spain,  so  that  it  became  necessary  to  relax  the  laws 
against  Romanism  ;  and  this  again  threw  the  Arch- 
bishop more  into  the  hands  of  the  Puritans. 

While  the  influence  of  Abbot  was  waning,  one 
whom  most  men  had  destined  for  his  place,  Lancelot 
Andrewes,  now  Bishop  of  Winchester,  became  a  lead- 
ing man.  But  one  whose  name  is  almost  forgotten 
by  ourselves  occupied  a  still  more  prominent  place 
in  the  affairs  of  that  time.  This  was  the  Dean  of 
Westminster,  John  Williams,  who  liad  managed,  by 
courtier-like  manners  and  real  ability,  to  get  con- 
siderable influence  with  the  Duke  of  Buckingham 
and  so  with  the  King.  When  Lord  Bacon  had  to 
resign  the  Great  Seal,  it  was  given  to  Williams ;  and 
he  showed  himself  not  unequal  to  the  great  post. 
He  shortly  became  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  and  obtained 
great  influence  in  the  making  of  ecclesiastical  ap- 
pointments. Among  others  whom  he  recommended 
for  promotion  was  William  Laud,  then  Dean  of 
Gloucester. 

The  King  had  no  liking  for  Laud.  He  had  given 
him  advice  on  the  occasion  of  the  introduction  of  the 
episcopate  into  the  Scottish  Church,  which  James 
regarded  as  unwise.  As  Dean  of  Gloucester,  he  had 
instituted  reforms  of  a  somewhat  throughgoing  char- 
acter, removing  the  altar  to  the  east  end  of  the  choir. 


The  King^s  change  towards  Calviniam.      889 

and  making  other  changes  which  we  should,  in  these 
days,  think  a  matter  of  course,  but  which  brought 
him  into  collision  with  the  bishop.  At  length,  how- 
ever, King  James  nomiiiated  Laud  to  the  Bishopric 
of  St.  David's. 

The  King's  change  of  attitude  was  not  approved 
by  Parliament;  and  the  Commons  ventured  on  an 
earnest  protest  which  the  King  received  by  tearing, 
with  his  own  hand,  from  the  Jouvnal  of  their  House 
the  record  of  their  protest.  The  Judges  were  im- 
mediately instructed  to  extend  a  pardon  to  all  who 
were  imprisoned  for  recusancy  in  religion  alone.  A 
number  of  Roman  Catholics  were  in  consequence  re- 
leased, and  the  Puritans  were  greatly  inflamed. 

But  there  was  a  danger  from  the  pulpits,  conse- 
quently order  was  given  that  the  preachers  should 
confine  themselves  to  the  subjects  of  the  Thirty-nine 
Articles.  Moreover,  they  were  forbidden,  unless  a 
bishop  or  a  dean,  to  preach  on  predestination  or  elec- 
tion. Neal  did  not  misrepresent  the  state  of  the 
case,  when,  referring  to  the  Synod  of  Dort,  he  said : 
"The  King  had  assisted  in  maintaining  these  doc- 
trines in  Holland,  but  will  not  have  them  propagated 
in  England.  From  this  time  all  Calvinists  were,  in 
a  manner,  excluded  from  court  preferments."  These 
instructions  were  much  complained  of,  especially 
where  they  were  enforced  by  the  bishops. 

At  the  same  time  the  suspicions  of  the  whole 
country  were  being  aroused,  and  Abbot  thought  it 
his  duty  to  address  an  earnest  remonstrance  to  the 
King,  with  special  reference  to  the  expedition  of 
Prince    Charles  and    Buckingham   to   Spain.     The 


390  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

alarm  was  allayed,  however,  by  the  return  of  the 
Prince  and  the  intelligence  that  the  match  had  been 
broken  off. 

The  Parliament  was  still  Calvinist  and  began  to 
interpose  with  the  view  of  putting  down  the  spread- 
ing Arminianism.  The  first  person  assailed  was 
Richard  Montagu,  a  roj'al  chaplain,  who,  in  a  con- 
troversy with  some  Jesuits  who  were  attempting  to 
make  proselytes  ill  his  parish,  had  maintained  that 
certain  theories  which  the  Jesuits  had  quoted  as  doc- 
trines of  the  Church  of  England,  were  merely  Puritan 
opinions.  He  was  answered  by  two  Puritan  lec- 
turers, who  made  extracts  from  his  book  and  peti- 
tioned Parliament  to  deal  with  them.  The  Arch- 
bishop was  requested  to  look  into  the  matter,  and  he 
condemned  the  statements  of  Montagu.  Laud  and 
others  recommended  Montagu  to  appeal  from  this 
censure  to  the  King.  This  appeal  was  afterwards 
heard,  but  not  by  James  I.     He  died  May  27,  1625. 

If  it  cannot  be  denied  that  King  James  was  sin- 
cerely attached  to  the  Church  of  England,  it  is 
equally  certain  that  his  policy  was  injurious  to  her 
best  interests,  especially  by  his  leading  the  Church, 
in  large  measure,  to  ackiriowledge  his  absurd  and 
unhistorical  autocratic  claims.  By  that  means  the 
friends  of  liberty  were  driven  into  the  Puritan  camp, 
in  consequence  of  which  great  danger  resulted  to  the 
Crown,  the  Church,  and  the  Nation. 


CHAPTER  XXVII. 

KING  CHABLES  I.  AND   ARCHBISHOP  LAUD. 

HE  remarks  on  the  polic}*  of  King  James 
must  be  applied  with  increased  emphasis 
to  that  of  his  son.  Of  the  personal  excel- 
lences of  Charles  I.  there  can  be  no  ques- 
tion ;  and  there  can  be  as  little  as  to  the  folly  of  his 
conduct  of  affairs  in  Church  and  State ;  and  he  could 
hardly  have  hi\d  a  counsellor  who  would  have  been 
a  less  safe  guide  for  a  man  like  himself  than  William 
Laud.  It  was  evident,  from  the  beginning  of  his 
reign,  that  Laud  and  not  Abbot  was  to  be  the  real 
leader  ot  the  Church  of  England. 

Abbot  anticipated  the  change  which  immediately 
took  place.  It  was  to  Laud  that  Charles  turned  for 
information  and  guidance ;  and  the  marriage  of  the 
young  king  to  Henrietta  Maria,  daughter  of  Henry 
IV.,  of  France,  only  made  the  separation  from  the 
Puritan  bishop  more  complete.  It  was  now  certain 
that  more  tolerance  would  be  granted  to  Rome  than 
to  Geneva.  Nor  could  the  most  flexible  of  Protes- 
tants view  with  satisfaction  the  inauguration  of 
Charles's  reign  and  married  life,  when  the  young 
Frenchwoman  was  forbidden  by  her  religious  direc- 
tors to  take  part  in  the  sacred  rite  of  Coronation, 
but  thought  it  not  unseemly  to  survey  the  ceremonial 
from  a  chamber  in  the  palace  yard  amid  circum- 
stances of  levity  and  frivolity. 

391 


392  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

The  preparations  for  the  Coronation  in  West- 
minster Abbey  were  made  by  Laud,  who  was  one  of 
the  Prebendaries,  as  Williams,  the  Dean,  was  then  in 
disgrace.  Although  some  of  the  ceremonies  were 
afterwards  charged  against  Laud,  it  does  not  appear 
that  Abbot,  who  administered  the  oath  and  performed 
the  Act  of  Coronation,  objected  to  any  of  them. 
The  ceremonies  were  the  same  as  were  used  both 
before  and  after  the  Reformation ;  and  the  crucifix 
which  was  placed  on  the  altar  was  found  among  the 
regalia. 

It  was  natural  enough  that  Abbot  should  be  made 
painfully  conscious  of  his  loss  of  importance  and  in- 
fluence ;  but  it  was  unfortunate  that  he  should  resent 
the  fact  by  rudeness  to  Laud,  which,  it  is  said,  he 
took  every  opportunity  of  exhibiting.  Laud,  who 
was  nearly  fifty-two  years  of  age  at  the  tune  of  King 
James's  death,  seems  to  have  behaved  with  great  for- 
bearance and  self-control.  When  Abbot  passed  away, 
at  the  age  of  seventy-two  (August  4,  1633),  he  was 
hardly  missed,  except  that  a  cause  of  friction  was  re- 
moved ;  nor  can  it  be  said  that  he  was  much  regretted 
by  his  own  party.  To  a  man  of  this  kind  it  is  not 
quite  easy  to  do  justice.  He  was  a  good  man,  a  con- 
scientious man  who  would  not  be  turned  from  his 
own  convictions  of  duty ;  but  he  was  narrow,  strict, 
and  austere.  It  was  his  misfortune  that  he  was  caned 
to  the  highest  place  in  the  Church.  Some  of  the 
closing  incidents  of  his  primacy  will  be  better  under- 
stood in  connection  with  the  work  of  his  successor. 
Archbishop  Laud. 

William  Laud  was  born  at  Reading,  October  7, 


Laud^s  Principles.  893 

1573.  In  1590  he  became  a  scholar  of  St.  John's 
College,  Oxford,  and  in  1593,  a  fellow.  He  was  or- 
dained in  1601 ;  and  in  1605  he  was  induced  to  per- 
form an  act  which  he  never  ceased  to  regret,  the 
marriage  of  the  Earl  of  Devonshire  to  the  divorced 
Lady  Rich.  In  1611  he  became  president  of  St. 
John's  College,  and  speedily  came  into  collision  with 
the  Calvinistic  Puritanism  which  was  prevalent  in  the 
University,  upholding  with  great  vigor  the  continuity 
of  the  Church  from  the  beginning,  in  opposition  to 
the  extreme  Protestants  who  were  content  to  be 
members  of  a  modern  sect,  and,  along  with  this,  set- 
ting forth  the  apostolical  succession  and  the  divine 
right  of  episcopacy. 

In  1616  he  became  Dean  of  Gloucester ;  and  to 
his  work  there,  which  was  done  with  the  approval  of 
the  King  and  to  the  advantage  of  the  Church,  refer- 
ence has  already  been  made.  In  1621,  with  some 
misgivings.  King  James  made  him  Bishop  of  St. 
David's.  It  was  soon  after  this  (in  1622)  that  Laud 
had  a  controversy  with  Fisher,  the  Jesuit.  His  con- 
tribution to  this  subject  is  of  real  value,  and  is  a 
clear  proof  of  the  injustice  of  the  charge  brought 
against  him  that  he  was  favorable  to  the  Church  of 
Rome.  To  those  who  refuse  to  submit  to  any  au- 
thority whicli  cannot  base  itself  upon  tlie  letter  of 
Scripture,  not  only  Laud  but  Hooker,  and  many 
others,  will  be  regarded  as  Romanizers ;  but  Laud 
found,  in  the  principles  which  he  recognized  as  prim- 
itive and  catholic,  a  defence  at  once  against  the 
tyranny  of  Romanism  and  the  dogmatism  of  Puri- 
tanism. 


894  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Laud  meant  to  be  catholic  and  comprehensive. 
"  The  wisdom  of  the  Church,"  he  said,  *'  hath  been 
in  all  ages,  or  the  most,  to  require  consent  to  articles 
in  general  as  much  as  may  be,  because  that  is  the 
way  of  unity;  and  the  Church  in  high  points  re- 
quiring assent  to  particulars  hath  been  rent."  Yet 
he  did  not  find  it  easy  to  carry  these  principles  into 
practice.  If  he  could  have  induced  men  to  shut  out 
from  their  speculations  those  points  which  he  deemed 
unnecessary,  things  might  Iiave  gone  better ;  but  he 
had  no  great  width  of  view,  and  he  was  a  strict  dis- 
ciplinarian without  much  sympathy  with  the  freedom 
begotten  of  entliusiasm. 

The  gulph  by  which  he  was  separated  from  the 
ordinary  Puritan  is  illustrated  by  Laud's  admiration 
for  Aristotle.  According  to  tlie  Puritan,  all  good 
was  tlie  result  of  a  continuous  inspiration  from  iibove. 
Laud  would  not  have  denied  this;  but  he  attaclied 
an  importance  to  the  formation  of  habits  and  the 
services  of  the  Church  which  the  Puritan  regarded 
as  legal  and  unevangelical.  As  habits  are  formed 
by  actions,  so  the  habit  of  religion  and  piety  is 
formed  by  religious  actions.  For  this  reason  lie  took 
in  hand  to  order  divine  service  with  greater  care  and 
reverence.  "  I  labored  nothing  more,"  he  says, 
"  than  that  the  external  worship  of  God  (too  much 
slighted  in  most  parts  of  this  kingdom)  might  be 
preserved,  and  that  with  as  much  decency  and  uni- 
formity as  might  be,  being  still  of  opinion,  that  unity 
cannot  long  continue  in  the  Church,  when  uniformity 
is  shut  out  at  the  church  doors.  And  I  evidently 
saw  that  the  public  neglect  of  God's  service  in  the 


■*;  <^ 


Laud  and  Williams.  395 

outward  face  of  it,  and  the  nasty  lying  of  many 
places  dedicated  to  that  service,  had  almost  cast  a 
damp  upon  the  true  and  inward  worship  of  God, 
which,  while  we  live  in  the  body,  needs  external 
helps,  and  all  little  enough  to  keep  it  in  any  vigor." 
Here  are  Laud's  principles  which  he  never  failed  to 
enforce— if  too  rigidly  and  with  too  little  regfird  to 
the  circumstances  and  difficulties  of  his  times,  yet 
with  absolute  sincerity  and  devotion. 

It  should  be  mentioned  that  it  was  through  his  con- 
troversy with  Fisher,  undertaken  in  the  hope,  which 
proved  vain,  of  preventing  the  secession  of  the  Duke 
of  Buckingham's  mother  to  Rome,  that  he  obtained 
a  considerable  influence  over  the  Duke  though  whom 
he  first  obtained  favor  with  King  James  and  Prince 
Charles. 

It  was  through  the  influence  of  Williams,  Dean  of 
Westminster  and  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  that  Laud  had 
been  promoted  to  St.  David's.  Williams's  friends 
say  that  his  influence  was  exerted  in  behalf  of  Laud 
out  of  friendship  for  him :  others  declare  that  it 
was  to  get  Laud  out  of  the  way,  so  that  he  might 
not  be  appointed  Dean  of  Westminster.  The 
neighbors  of  Williams  had  no  great  belief  in  his 
disinterestedness ;  and,  although  he  managed  to 
creep  up  into  the  highest  place  in  the  Church  but 
one,  this  was  attributed  to  his  policy  rather  than  his 
merits. 

Williams  and  Laud  had  never  much  in  comnion ; 
and  they  drifted  further  apart.  When  Prince  Charles 
and  Buckingham  went  to  Spain,  Laud  had  no  respon- 
sibility in   connection   with   that   expedition;    but 


896  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Buckingham  had  asked  him  to  look  after  his  inter- 
ests in  his  absence.  When  he  found  that  Williams 
was  fomenting  the  popular  discontent  in  regard  to 
the  Spanish  marriage,  and  throwing  the  blame  of  it 
upon  the  Duke  of  Buckingham,  to  whom  he  owed 
his  own  elevation,  Laud  felt  bound  to  inform  the 
Duke  of  what  was  going  on.  As  a  result  there  was 
a  rupture  between  Buckingham  and  Williams,  and 
so  between  Williams  and  Laud.  Soon  after  the 
accession  of  Charles,  Williams  was  deprived  of  his 
office  of  Lord  Keeper,  apparently  through  the  influ- 
ence of  Buckingham. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  attack 
made  on  Richard  Montagu,  his  condemnation  by 
Abbot,  and  his  appeal  to  the  King  in  his  book  en- 
titled Appello  Goisarem.  The  House  of  Commons 
appointed  a  committee  to  examine  into  the  doctrinal 
character  of  the  book.  As  a  result  the  opinion  of 
the  House  was  given,  that  "  he  was  guilty  of  an  of- 
fence against  the  state,  and  so  to  be  presented  to  the 
Lords."  Upon  this  the  King  interposed  for  the  pro- 
tection of  his  chaplain ;  and  Montagu  was  defended 
by  Bishops  Laud,  Houson,  and  Buckeridge,  who  de- 
clared that  his  teaching  was  in  accordance  with  the 
doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England.  Parliament 
was  dissolved,  so  that  no  further  steps  could  be  taken 
in  the  matter. 

Charles  determined  to  make  use  of  the  Clergy  for 
the  propagation  of  his  absolutist  theories  of  govern- 
ment. The  "  tuning  of  the  pulpits  "  had  been  used 
by  Queen  Elizabeth;  and,  although  the  influence  of 
the  Clergy  had  greatly  declined,  the  King  thought 


Parliament  and  the  Bishops.  897 

he  might  still,  in  this  manner,  advance  his  cause. 
Consequently  sermons  were  preached  and  published, 
setting  forth  the  power  of  the  prince  to  make  laws 
Jure  divino,  and  also  to  impose  taxes.  One  of  these 
sermons  was  preached  by  Dr.  Sibthorp  at  the  Assizes 
in  Northampton.  Abbot  was  asked  to  licence  it,  and 
refused,  whereupon  he  was  practically  suspended, 
being  commanded  to  remain  in  his  house.  The  ser- 
mon was  licenced  by  Bishop  Mountain  of  London 
(May  8,  1627).  Several  other  sermons  of  the  same 
kind  were  preached  and  published.  By  this  means 
the  public  feeling  against  the  Clergy  was  very  much 
embittered. 

Again  the  attack  of  Parliament  was  directed 
against  Arminianism,  and  particularly  against  cer- 
tain persons  near  the  King,  as  Neile,  Bishop  of  Win- 
chester, and  Laud,  now  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells, 
"justly  suspected  to  be  unsound  in  their  opinions 
that  way."  In  Laud  s  answer,  a  principal  point 
made  was  that  such  an  accusation  was  a  grave  reflec- 
tion upon  his  Majesty  ;  "  as  if  his  Majesty  is  so  igno- 
rant in  matters  of  religious  belief,  or  so  indifferent  in 
maintaining  them,  as  that  any  singular  opinion  should 
grow  up,  or  any  faction  prevail  in  his  kingdom  wit.;* 
out  his  knowledge."  This  was  quite  in  accordance 
with  Laud's  Erastian  principles.  Apparently  Clergy 
and  Convocation  were  useful  chiefly  in  giving  atten- 
tion to  matters  commended  to  their  consideration  by 
the  Sovereign. 

The  public  feeling,  however,  only  grew  stronger 
against  the  tendency  which  was  regarded  as  Romaniz- 
ing ;  and  the  King  thought  it  prudent  to  recall  Abbot 


398  The  Anglican  Beformation. 

to  court ;  and  although  Montagu  had  been  made  a 
bishop,  his  book  Appello  Ccesarem  was  now  sup- 
pressed. At  the  same  time  a  declaration  was  pre- 
fixed to  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  requiring  that  these 
controversies  between  Calvinists  and  Arminians 
should  cease ;  but  the  House  of  Commons  regarded 
this  as  simply  a  condemnation  of  Calvinism,  and  on 
the  very  first  day  of  their  session,  Francis  Rouse, 
author  of  the  Scotch  metrical  version  of  the  Psalms, 
made  a  violent  attack  upon  the  Arminians.  He  was 
followed  by  Pym  and  others  on  the  same  side,  and 
as  a  result  the  House  declared  their  adhesion  to  the 
Lambeth  Articles.  The  first  recorded  utterance  of 
Oliver  Cromwell  is  on  the  same  side.  Parliament 
was  dissolved  in  1629  and  did  not  meet  again  for 
eleven  years.  In  the  previous  year  Mountain  had 
been  removed  to  York,  and  Laud  succeeded  him  as 
Bishop  of  London  (July  4,  1628).  Shortly  after- 
wards, whilst  Montagu  was  being  consecrated  at 
Croydon,  there  came  the  news  of  the  assassination 
of  the  Duke  of  Buckingham  by  John  Felton  at 
Portsmouth  (August  23, 1628).  The  vices  of  Buck- 
ingham have  been  exaggerated,  his  virtues  forgotten, 
his  personal  beauty  made  almost  a  fault.  To  Laud 
his  loss  was  great. 

We  must  pass  lightly  over  the  civil  and  political 
side  of  Laud's  work,  although  it  is  not  easily  sepa- 
rated from  the  ecclesiastical.  One  work  of  great  im- 
portance which  he  undertook  was  a  careful  inquiry 
into  various  abuses  which  were  tending  to  the  de- 
struction of  the  property  of  the  Church  and  the 
hindering  of  her  usefulness.    Bishops,  says  Heylin, 


The  Kingh  Instructions.  899 

were  gelling  off  their  woods  to  enrich  themselves, 
thereby  impoverishing  their  successors.  The  bishops 
were  living  at  Westminster,  so  as  to  be  on  the  out- 
look for  further  preferment,  instead  of  residing  in 
their  dioceses  and  doing  tlieir  work  there;  and  a 
multitude  of  lecturers  were  found  "  in  the  city  or 
country,  whose  work  it  was  to  undermine  both  the 
doctrine  and  the  government"  of  the  Church.  Laud 
reported  this  state  of  things  to  the  King;  and  his 
Majesty  issued  a  body  of  "  Instructions "  to  the 
bishops ;  in  which  they  were  told  to  be  careful  not 
to  ordain  unfit  persons  to  the  ministry;  nor  to  allow 
afternoon  sermons,  but  to  enforce  catechising.  All 
lecturers  were  to  read  divine  service,  properly  vested, 
before  their  lecture.  Lectures  were  to  be  arranged 
to  be  given  by  a  number  of  neighboring  Clergy 
preaching  in  turn,  and  they  were  to  preach  in 
their  gowns,  not  in  cloaks.  None,  save  noblemen 
and  those  qualified  by  law,  were  to  retain  chaplains 
in  their  houses.  All  were  required  to  be  regular  in 
attendance  at  divine  service.  Bishops  were  not  to 
grant  leases  after  they  had  been  nominated  to  other 
sees,  nor  to  cut  down  timber  but  merely  to  receive 
the  rents  due,  or  their  nominations  would  be  can- 
celled. A  report  was  to  be  made,  at  the  beginning 
of  each  year,  of  the  manner  in  which  these  instruc- 
tions had  been  carried  out. 

It  must  be  confessed  that  this  reveals  a  very  bad 
state  of  things;  and  the  opposition  aroused  by  the 
instructions  would  be  hardly  intelligible,  but  for  the 
restraints  put  upon  the  lectures.  Some  of  the  com- 
plaints were  ludicrous  enough,  especially  those  of 


400  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

the  bishops  who  were  unwilling  to  be  banished  to 
their  dioceses.  The  King  and  his  counsellor  were 
resolved  to  go  further.  Some  of  the  Calvinists  were 
not  content  to  submit  to  the  restraint  laid  upon  them 
by  the  declaration  prefixed  to  the  Articles,  and  in- 
sisted on  preaching  on  predestination  and  election. 
For  this  offence  Davenant,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  was 
summoned  to  appear  before  the  Council,  and  admon- 
ished to  desist  from  such  preaching  for  the  future, 
and  three  clerg^^men  of  Oxford  were  censured  and 
expelled  from  the  University.  It  became  manifest 
that  there  was  to  be  no  toleration  for  any  opinions 
but  those  of  the  King  and  the  Bishop  of  London. 
Even  the  foreign  Protestants  who  had  been  guaran- 
teed in  the  exercise  of  their  own  religion  by  Eliza- 
beth and  James  were  now  required  to  conform  to 
the  Church  of  England  under  pain  of  excommunica- 
tion. 

So  far  Laud  had  been  Bishop  of  London  ;  but  the 
change  which  took  place  at  the  death  of  Abbot  was 
merely  a  nominal  one.  When  Laud  was  confirmed 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  September  19,  1633,  he 
took  possession  legally  of  the  authority  which  he  had 
previously  exercised  in  fact.  Both  he  and  the  King 
seemed  satisfied  that,  as  their  aims  were  good,  so 
they  were  being  successfully  attained,  and  this  with- 
out any  serious  opposition  from  the  people.  The 
first  to  attempt  to  undeceive  the  Archbishop  was  a 
young  man  named  Edward  Hyde,  afterwards  the 
famous  Lord  Clarendon.  He  was  at  this  time  only 
twenty-five  years  of  age,  while  Laud  was  sixty ;  and 


Laud  and  Hyde.  401 


it  says  something  for  the  humility  of  the  Archbishop 
tliat  he  allowed  such  freedom  of  speech.^ 

Mr.  Hyde  found  the  Archbishop  walking  in  his 
garden,  and  was  asked,  "  What  good  news  from  the 
country?"  To  which  he  answered  that  there  was 
none  good :  the  people  were  universally  discon- 
tented ;  and  many  spoke  evil  of  his  Grace,  as  the 
cause  of  all  that  was  amiss.  He  replied  that  he  was 
sorry  for  it:  he  knew  he  did  not  deserve  it;  and  that 
he  must  not  give  over  serving  the  King  and  the 
Church,  to  please  the  people.  Hyde  replied  that 
this  was  not  necessary,  but  that  people  complained 
of  the  shappness  and  harshness  of  his  manner ;  and 
that  this  kind  of  behavior  on  his  part  was  generally 
commented  upon.  Laud  listened  with  great  pa- 
tience, and  said  that  he  was  very  unfortunate  to  be 
so  ill-understood ;  that  he  meant  very  well ;  but  that 
by  an  imperfection  of  nature,  which  he  said  often 
troubled  him,  he  might  speak  with  such  sharpness  of 
voice  as  to  make  men  believe  that  he  was  angry  when 
there  was  no  such  thing.  Hyde  persisted  in  his 
remonstrances,  and  entreated  the  Archbishop  to 
show  a  more  conciliatory  manner,  and  treat  men 
•with  more  courtesy.  The  Archbishop  smiled  and 
said  he  could  only  undertake  for  his  heart,  that  he 
had  very  good  meaning ;  for  his  tongue  he  could  not 
undertake  that  he  should  not  sometimes  speak  more 
hastily  and  sharply  than  he  should  do.  Instead  of 
being  offended  with  the  freedom  of  the  young  man, 

^  Others  place  this  incident  at  a  later  period,  six  years  after- 
wards.   Hyde  would  then  have  been  thirty<one. 

Z 


402  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

it  is  said  that  the  Archbishop  always  treated  him 
very  graciously. 

There  seems  to  be  no  doubt  that  Laud  was  about 
this  time  offered  a  cardinal's  hat  by  a  person  coming 
to  Iiim  privately  and  assuring  him  that  he  did  so  by 
commission  of  his  superiors.  Whether  the  offer  was 
a  genuine  one  or  merely  an  attempt  to  entrap  the 
Archbishop,  it  was  at  once  rejected  by  him  ;  and  he 
states,  in  his  diary,  that  "  something  dwelt  within 
him  which  would  not  suffer  that,  till  Rome  was 
otherwise  than  it  was  at  the  present  time." 

In  every  department  the  Archbishop  put  forth  his 
energies  for  the  enforcement  of  the  law  of  the 
Church.  The  Injunctions  of  1629  were  renewed; 
and,  that  which  gave  still  more  offence.  King 
James's  "  Book  of  Sports  "  was  commended  to  the 
people,  in  opposition  to  the  Puritanical  severity 
which  was  being  enforced  in  different  parts  of  the 
country.  Chief  Justice  Richardson  had  forbidden 
all  village  feasts  and  walces  on  Sunday,  and  had 
ordered  the  Clergy  to  publish  the  prohibition  in 
time  of  service.  For  this  he  was  reproved  by  the 
Archbishop  at  the  Council  Table,  and  the  King,  in 
republishing  the  "  Book  of  Sports,"  declared  that 
"  these  feasts  with  others  shall  be  observed,  and  that 
our  justices  of  the  peace  shall  see  them  conducted 
orderly,  and  that  neighborhood  and  freedom  with 
manlike  and  lawful  exercises  be  used."  This  was 
one  of  the  most  serious  matters  of  accusation  against 
Laud  when  he  was  afterwards  brought  to  trial. 

But  one  of  the  gravest  changes  effected  by  Laud, 
and  one  most  strongly  objected  to  by  the  Puritans, 


Prevalence  of  Irregularities.  403 

was  the  removal  of  the  Holy  Table  to  the  east  end 
of  the  chancel  and  placing  it  north  and  south,  as  it 
was  said,  altarwise.  This  was  the  potilion  of  the 
Table  until  the  second  Book  of  Edwaril  VI.  Under 
this,  however,  many  altars  were  destroyed  and  tables 
set  up,  generally  standing  east  and  west  in  the  middle 
of  the  chancel  or  in  the  body  of  the  church.  Under 
Elizabeth,  it  was  directed  that,  at  the  time  of  com- 
munion, the  table  might  be  put  in  the  most  con- 
venient position ;  but  at  other  times  it  generally 
stood  in  its  old  place. 

Great  irregularities  had  taken  place  and  even 
gross  irreverence  had  been  shown  in  the  tretitment 
of  sacred  buildings  and  their  furniture.  Business 
was  often  transacted  within  the  churches.  The 
Holy  Table  was  even  used  by  the  church  wardens 
for  the  settlement  of  their  accounts  and  the 
transaction  of  parish  business ;  and  it  was  quite 
common  for  hats  and  cloaks  to  be  deposited  upon 
it.  Occasionally  it  was  used  as  a  seat.  Laud 
gives  an  account  of  an  incident  which  speaks  very 
plainly  of  the  state  of  things.  Writing  to  the  King, 
he  says,  "  At  Taplow  there  happened  a  very  ill 
accident  by  reason  of  not  having  the  Communion 
Table  railed  in,  that  it  might  be  kept  from  profana- 
tions. For  in  the  sermon  time  a  dog  came  to  the 
table  and  took  the  loaf  of  bread  prepared  for  the 
Holy  Sacrament  in  his  mouth,  and  ran  away  with 
it.  Some  of  the  parishioners  took  the  same  from 
the  dog,  and  set  it  again  upon  the  table.  After 
sermon,  the  minister  could  not  think  fit  to  conse- 
crate  this  bread,   and  other  fit  for  the  sacrament 


404  The  Anyllcan  Reformation. 

was  not  to  be  had  in  that  town,  so  there  was  no 
communion. 

During  Abbot*s  time  things  had  probably  got 
worse  ;  and  it  was  certainly  no  great  proof  of  super- 
stition on  the  part  of  Laud,  that  he  should  desire  the 
more  decent  ordering  of  the  furniture  for  the  most 
sacred  ordinance  of  the  church.  All  that  he  asked 
was  what  is  found,  at  the  present  moment,  in  almost 
every  church  of  the  Anglican  communion — that  the 
table  should  be  placed  at  the  east  end  of  the 
Church,  raised  a  little  above  the  pavement,  and 
railed  in.  Yet  for  this,  perhaps  more  than  for  any- 
thing else,  he  was  accused  of  intending  "  to  advance 
and  usher  in  popery ;  "  although  his  plea  will  now 
be  generally  received :  "  it  is  surely  not  popery  to  set 
a  rail  to  keep  profanation  from  the  Holy  Table ;  nor 
is  it  any  innovation  to  place  it  at  the  upper  end  of 
the  chancel,  as  the  alt.ir  stood."  He  declared  that 
the  position  of  the  table  signified  no  difference  of 
doctrine,  but  that  the  order  was  given  for  the  sake 
of  uniformity.  And  he  quotes  the  injunctions  of 
Elizabeth  which  order  "that  the  Holy  Table  in 
every  church  (mark  it,  I  pray  you,  not  in  the 
royal  chapel  or  cathedrals  only,  but  in  every  church) 
shall  be  decently  made  and  set  in  the  place 
where  the  altar  stood.  Now,"  he  goes  on,  "the 
altar  stood  at  the  upper  end  of  the  choir,  north  and 

south So  you  see  here's  neither  popery 

nor  innovation  in  all  the  practice  of  Queen  Elizabeth 
or  since." 

In  spile  of  this  which  to  ourselves  sounds  quite 
reasonable,  the  greatest  excitement  and  opposition  to 


Position  of  the  Altar.  405 

the  change  arose.  Among  those  who  took  part 
against  Laud  was  Williams ;  but  none  of  those  who 
wrote  against  the  position  of  the  altar  denied  the 
irrevereuce  of  which  the  Archbishop  complained. 
♦*  Such,"  says  Fuller,  "  was  the  heat  about  this  altar, 
that  both  sides  had  almost  sacrificed  up  their  mutual 
charity  thereon,  and  this  controversy  was  prosecuted 
with  much  needless  animosity/' 

Laud  said  he  cared  comparatively  little  for  the 
name  that  should  be  given,  whether  table  or  altar ; 
but  he  contended  for  the  position  in  the  interests  of 
reverence ;  and  the  bishops  generally  agreed  with 
him,  even  some  of  those  who  had  previously  opposed 
him.  In  some  dioceses  the  bishops  explained  the 
reasons  for  the  change,  before  giving  the  order,  and 
in  such  cases  there  was  seldom  much  trouble.  But 
in  other  places  there  was  considerable  opposition ; 
and  in  the  diocese  of  Lincoln,  Bishop  Williams  re- 
fused to  put  the  order  in  operation.  This  gave  rise 
to  a  controversy  between  Williams  and  Laud  who 
claimed  to  exercise  his  authority  as  metropolitan  in 
the  diocese,  a  claim  which  was  allowed  by  the  courts. 
But  although  the  diocese  was  visited,  and  injunctions 
issued  by  the  Vicar-General,  Williams  did  what  he 
could  to  prevent  conformity  to  them.  He  pretended 
obedience  by  putting  a  rail  round  the  table,  while 
leaving  it  in  the  middle  of  the  chancel. 

Hardly  less  offensive  than  the  change  in  the  posi- 
tion of  the  altar  was  the  ritual  which  Laud  is  said 
to  have  practised.  One  of  the  things  charged  against 
him  was  the  use  of  the  cope,  although  even  Abbot 
had  worn  a  richly  decorated  cope  at  the  Coronation 


406  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

of  King  Charles.  One  of  the  witnesses  against 
Laud  at  his  trial  said,  "  There  were  copes  used  in 
some  colleges,  and  a  traveller  might  say,  upon  the 
sight  of  them,  that  he  saw  first  such  a  thing  upon  the 
Pope's  back."  "The  wise  man,"  retorted  Laud, 
"might  have  said  as  much  of  a  gown."  And  he 
pleaded  quite  properly  that  they  were  not  only  al- 
lowed, but  required  by  the  canons  to  be  worn  in 
cathedral  churches.  Another  accusation  was  the 
use  of  wafer  bread  in  the  sacrament.  This  he  de- 
nied. "  For  wafers,"  he  said,  "  I  never  either  gave 
or  received  the  communion  but  in  ordinary  bread. 
At  Westminster,  I  knew  it  was  sometimes  used,  but 
as  a  thing  indifferent."  Some  other  accusations 
were  absurd,  such  as  the  charge  of  holding  the  doc- 
trine of  Transubstantiation.  Even  the  accounts  of 
extravagant  gestures  at  the  communion  must  be  re- 
ceived with  qualification,  when  we  remember  that,  in 
the  eyes  of  some  of  Laud's  Puritan  opponents,  the 
mere  kneeling  at  the  reception  of  the  communion 
v^oj'ld  savor  of  idolatry. 

ijaud  was  not  contented  with  merely  putting  the 
English  Church  in  order :  his  aims  extended  to  Ire- 
land and  Scotland  as  well.  He  was  deeply  inter- 
ested in  the  work  done  in  Ireland  by  his  friend  Lord 
Strafford ;  but  he  was  greatly  set  upon  completing 
the  organization  of  the  Scottish  Cliurch  after  the 
English  model,  and  so  bringing  to  completion  the 
work  begun  by  the  restoration  of  the  episcopate 
under  King  James.  Laud  had  then  wished  to  intro- 
duce the  Prayer  Book  into  Scotland ;  but  the  King 
knew  the  people  too  well  to  allow  it.     Now,  however, 


Scotch  Prayer  Book.  407 

botli  Laud  and  Charles  were  hoping  that  the  time 
was  ripe  for  such  an  undertaking.  Tlie  King,  on  his 
visit  to  Edinburgh  in  1633,  had  left  directions  for  the 
compilation  of  a  Prayer  Book,  and  had  appointed  a 
committee  of  Scottish  bishops  for  that  purpose,  direct- 
ing them  to  correspond  with  Laud. 

A  book  was  prepared  for  Scotland,  and  signed  by 
the  King,  September  28,  1634  ;  but  a  body  of  canons 
was  first  prepared,  and  published  to  prepare  the  way 
for  the  Prayer  Book  (1635).  So  far  was  it  from 
having  this  effect,  that  the  people  were  alarmed  at 
the  high  claims  set  forth  for  the  Sovereign,  and  at 
some  of  the  requirements  of  the  canons,  besides  that 
they  were  enjoined  to  a  strict  observance  of  a  Prayer 
Book  which  they  had  never  seen.  Before  the  book 
was  put  forth,  it  underwent  further  revision  and  it 
finally  received  the  King's  signature  and  confirma- 
tion, December  20,  1636.  Laud  has  been  held  re- 
sponsible for  this  Prayer  Book;  but  two  tilings  seem 
to  be  quite  certain,  first,  that  he  did  not  offer  him- 
self for  the  work,  but  simply  acted  under  the  instruc- 
tions of  the  King,  and  as  cooperating  with  the  Scot- 
tish bishops  ;  and  further,  that  he  was  all  along  de- 
sirous of  having  the  English  Prayer  Book  introduced 
into  Scotland  without  any  changes  being  made. 
Not  only  was  Laud  made  responsible  for  what  was 
done,  and  no  one  rejoiced  more  than  he  did  at  the 
introduction  of  the  Prayer  Book,  but  he  was  charged 
with  intending  to  introduce  Romanism  as  well.  It 
may  be  well  to  recall  his  self-vindication.  "  The 
worst  thought,"  he  says,  "I  had  of  any  Reformed 
Church   in   Christendom   was   to   wish  it  like   the 


408  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

Church  of  England,  and  so  much  better  as  it  should 
please  God  to  make  it.  And  I  hope  that  this  was 
neither  to  negotiate  with  Home,  nor  to  reduce  them 
to  heresy  in  doctrine,  nor  to  superstition  and  idol- 
atry in  worship  ;  no,  nor  to  tyranny  in  government ; 
all  which  are  most  wrongfully  imputed  to  me.  And 
the  comparing  of  me  to  the  Pope  himself  I  could 
bear  with  more  ease,  had  I  not  written  more  against 
Popish  superstition  than  any  presbyter  of  Scotland 
hath  done.  And  for  my  part  I  could  be  content  to 
lay  down  my  life  to-morrow  upon  condition  that 
the  Pope  and  Church  of  Rome  would  admit  and 
confirm  the  Service  Book  which  hath  been  so 
eagerly  charged  against  me.  For  were  that  done, 
it  would  give  a  greater  blow  to  Popery,  which  is 
the  corruption  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  than  any 
that  hath  yet  been  given,  and  that  they  know  full 
well." 

Here  as  always  there  is  no  question  of  Laud's  sin- 
cerity, or  even  of  the  generfil  excellence  of  his  aims. 
Nor,  perliaps,  can  we  hold  him  entirely  responsible 
for  the  mismanagement  of  the  affair.  As  regards  the 
changes  in  the  Service  Book,  they  were  unimportant. 
"Presbyter"  was  substituted  for  "Priest."  The 
Consecration  Prayer  was  altered,  and  certain  other 
changes  were  made  in  the  communion  service,  in  the 
judgment  of  learned  ritualists,  all  for  the  better. 
Some  of  them  are  retained  in  the  American  Prayer 
Book.  But  the  manner  of  the  introduction  of  the 
book  was  most  unfortunate.  No  care  was  taken  to 
prepare  the  minds  of  the  people  or  to  conciliate  them 
to  the  proposed  change;  nor,  on  the  other  hand, 


Booh  used  in  Edinburgh.  409 

were  precautions  taken  for  the  enforcing  of  obedi- 
ence. Clarendon,  who  was  no  friend  to  Puritanism 
or  Presbyterianism,  says  that  "everything  was  left 
in  the  same  state  of  unconcernedness  as  it  was  be- 
fore; not  so  much  as  the  Council  being  better  in- 
formed of  it,  as  if  they  had  been  sure  that  all  men 
would  have  submitted  to  it  for  conscience'  sake." 

The  new  service  was  read  for  the  first  time  in  St. 
Giles's  Cathedral,  Edinburgh,  in  July,  1637 ;  and  it 
was  received  with  a  burst  of  indignation  and  furious 
rioting,  the  Dean  being  assailed  with  missiles  of  all 
kinds.  When  the  bishop  went  into  the  pulpit,  he 
was  saluted  in  the  same  manner,  and  in  leaving  the 
Cathedral,  narrowly  escaped  with  his  life.  The  im- 
mediate effects  of  the  innovation  were  very  serious ; 
but  the  ultimate  consequences  were  far  worse.  It 
was  not  merely  the  end  of  episcopacy  in  Scotland, 
but  it  was  the  beginning  of  a  movement  that  was  to 
work  endless  woe  for  England.  A  committee,  known 
as  "The  Tables,"  was  formed  in  Edinburgh,  and 
they  drew  up  the  tremendous  document  known  as 
the  "  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,"  by  which  they 
pledged  themselves  and  all  who  should  join  them  to 
jring  about  "  without  respect  of  persons  the  extirpa- 
tion of  prelacy ;  that  is  church  government  by 
archbishops,  bishops,  their  chancellors,  commissa- 
ries, deans  and  chapters,  archdeacons,  and  all  other 
ecclesiastical  officers  depending  on  that  hierarchy  " 
throughout  Great  Britain  and  Ireland.  The  docu- 
ment was  read  aloud  and  subscribed  in  Grey  Friar's 
Church  (March,  1638).  Attempts  at  conciliation 
were  made  by  the  King's  government;  but  it  was 


410  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

too  late.  A  general  assembly  was  demanded  and 
conceded  by  the  King.  They  met,  abolished 
episcopacy,  excommunicated  all  who  should  favor  it, 
condemned  the  Prayer  Book  and  other  parts  of  the 
English  system  introduced  into  Scotland.  The  King 
had  so  far  to  give  way  as  to  sanction  the  Covenant,  and 
order  the  Service  Book  and  canons  to  be  set  aside. 
But  the  effect  of  the  movement  in  England  had  yet 
to  be  seen. 

When  Parliament  met  April  13,  1640,  it  became 
evident  that  the  methods  of  Laud  had  produced  the 
worst  possible  effects  in  the  country,  had  greatly 
strengthened  the  cause  of  the  Puritans,  and  alien- 
ated many  of  the  best  men  from  the  Church.  The 
feeling  of  resentment  broke  out  at  the  opening  of 
Parliament  in  the  utterances  of  several  of  the  mem- 
bers; but  it  was  Pym  who  on  the  17th  of  April 
enumerated  in  detail  the  grievances  of  the  people 
and  the  offences  of  the  clergy  :  "  Popish  books  pub- 
lished and  used,  and  the  introducing  of  popish  cere- 
monies, as  altars,  bowing  towards  the  east,  pictures, 
crosses,  crucifixes,  and  the  like,  which,  of  themselves 
considered,  are  so  many  dry  bones,  but,  being  put  to- 
gether, make  the  man."  He  then  went  on  to  complain 
of  the  discouraging  of  goodly  men ;  of  the  depriva- 
tion of  ministers  for  refusing  to  read  the  Book  of 
Sports ;  of  the  encroaching  upon  the  King's  authority 
by  ecclesiastical  courts,  especially  the  High  Commis- 
sion. 

A  few  days  afterwards  (April  28)  the  Commons 
had  a  conference  with  the  Lords,  declaring  that  they 
would  be  bound  by  no  canons  passed  by  Convoca- 


f""  VT  ', 


Doubtful  Legality  of  Innovations.  411 

tion,  without  the  consent  of  Parliament;  and  they 
enumerated  certain  grievances  which  they  wanted 
removed.  As  they  showed  no  disposition  to  give 
way  or  to  grant  the  supplies  unless  their  grievances 
were  redressed,  the  King  dissolved  Parliament.  But 
it  was  evident  that  neither  he,  nor  even  Laud  who 
began  to  feel  troubled,  bad  formed  any  just  concep- 
tion of  the  gravity  of  the  situation.  Among  the 
difficulties  of  their  position  was  the  doubtful  legality 
of  some  of  their  orders.  In  regard  to  the  place  of 
the  Holy  Table,  they  might  quote  the  injunction  of 
Elizabeth,  but  the  rubric  which  was  sanctioned  by 
Statute  Law  allowed  the  table  to  be  placed  in  the 
chancel  in  the  body  of  the  Church.  In  order  to  put 
an  end  to  doubts  on  this  subject  a  canon  was  passed 
in  Convocation.  But  such  a  process  was  not  likely 
to  propitiate  those  who  complained  that  the  ecclesias- 
tical courts  were  exceeding  their  power.  And  the 
way  in  which  Convocation  was  kept  together  after 
the  dissolution  of  Parliament  made  its  ordinances 
still  more  suspected.  As  it  seemed  doubtful  whether 
this  could  be  done,  the  judges  were  consulted  and 
gave  their  opinion  that  the  Convocation,  being 
called  by  the  King's  writ,  might  remain  until  it  was 
dissolved,  notwithstanding  the  dissolution  of  Parlia- 
ment. The  judges  were  probably  right;  but,  in 
order  to  make  sure,  a  new  writ  was  issued;  and  this 
was  a  mistake  and  probably  illegal. 

This  was  not  the  worst  of  the  matter.  In  draw- 
ing up  the  canon  required,  the  assembly  prescribed 
a  new  oath  to  be  taken  by  the  clergy.  This,  in  it- 
self, was  objectionable;  but  the  form  of  the  oath 


412  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

was  worse.  It  will  be  better  to  give  its  terms:  "I, 
A.  B.,  do  swear  that  I  approve  the  doctrine  and  dis- 
cipline or  government  established  in  the  Church  of 
England  as  containing  all  things  necessary  to  salva- 
tion, and  that  I  will  not  endeavor  by  myself  or  any 
other,  directly  or  indirectly,  to  bring  in  any  popish 
doctrine  contrary  to  that  which  is  so  established; 
nor  will  I  ever  give  my  consent  to  alter  the  govern- 
ment of  this  church  by  archbishops,  bishops,  deans, 
and  archdeacons,  et  cetera^  as  it  stands  now  estab- 
lished." 

This  oath  was  evidently  intended  as  a  counter- 
blast to  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant ;  but  the 
addition  of  the  words  et  cetera  was  most  unfortunate. 
In  fact  it  was  put  in  the  draft  and  intended  to  be 
expanded  by  the  mention  of  the  officers  named  in  the 
Solemn  League ;  but  the  thing  was  done  in  a  hurry, 
and  so  the  phrase  was  permitted  to  remain.  The 
whole  country  was  instantly  in  commotion ;  and  every- 
where there  was  refusal  to  take  the  oath.  Sanderson, 
who  was  then  a  proctor  in  Convocation,  and  after  the 
Restoration  for  a  short  time  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  a  man 
well  affected  towards  the  Archbishop,  wrote  to  warn 
him  of  the  "  great  distaste  that  is  taken  generally  in 
the  Kingdom  at  the  oath  enjoined  by  the  late 
canons."  The  King  found  it  necessary  to  give  orders 
that  the  oath  should  not  be  enforced  until  the  next 
Convocation.  One  result  of  the  measure  was  riot- 
ing in  London.  The  Convocation  had  to  be  pro- 
tected by  a  military  guard,  the  Archbishop,  attacked 
at  Lambeth,  had  taken  refuge  at  Whitehall,  and 
the    High  Commission    Court   had  retired   to  St. 


Doubtful  Legality  of  Innovations.  413 

Paul's,  but  here  they  .were  assaulted  by  the  mob. 
Everj'where  the  suspicion  was  abroad  that  the  liber- 
ties of  the  people,  civil  and  religious,  were  in  danger. 
Such  were  the  preparations  for  the  holding  of  the 
Long  Parliament. 


CHAPTER  XXVIII. 

THE  LONG   PARLIAMENT  AND  THE  REBELLION. 

HERE  are  few  things  more  remarkable  or 
more  instructive  than  the  vicissitudes  of 
religious  thought  and  sympathy  in  the 
same  people.  If  one  were  to  judge  by 
mere  appearances,  one  should  suppose  that  a  genera- 
tion had  undergone  a  thorough  revolution  of  opin- 
ion. At  the  end  of  King  Edward's  reign  the  people 
are  apparently  sick  of  Protestantism,  as  they  are  of 
Romanism  at  the  end  of  Mary's.  Elizabeth  seems 
to  leave  the  country  consolidated  in  Anglicanism, 
which  gets  shaken  under  James  and  almost  sup- 
planted by  Puritanism  under  Charles.  There  is  no 
doubt  that  considerable  changes  of  this  kind  actually 
did  take  place.  Men*s  opinions  are  not  the  result  of 
mere  thought  and  argument,  but  largel}^  of  sym- 
pathy and  association.  But  in  each  case  the  real 
change  was  less  than  the  apparent ;  and  in  the  days 
of  Charles  and  Laud  many  men  were  driven  into  the 
Puritan  camp,  because  it  seemed  the  refuge  of  lib- 
erty, when  they  had  no  real  sympathy  with  Puritau 
theology. 

The  Long  Parliament  opened  on  the  3d  of  No- 
vember, 1640 ;  and  the  topics  which  had  caused  the 
dissolution  of  the  Short  Parliament  immediately 
came  to  the  front.    Complaints  arose  from  all  quar- 

414 


Discontent  and  Complaints.  415 

ters  of  the  Court  of  High  Commission,  of  the  ill- 
treatment  of  the  Puritan  Clergy,  and  especially  of 
the  "most  monstrous  oath"  recently  imposed  by  the 
canon  of  the  synod ;  and  the  denunciations  of  the 
novelties  of  ritual  and  the  like  were  repeated.  In 
1637  Prynne  had  been  placed  in  the  pillory  and 
others  had  been  fined  and  mutilated  for  libelling  the 
bishops  ;  and  now  in  the  Parliament  it  was  proposed 
that  compensation  should  be  made  to  them,  and  that 
the  money  should  be  paid  by  the  Archbishop  of 
Canterbury  and  the  other  ecclesiastical  commis- 
sioners. 

The  first  clergyman  assailed  was  Cosin,  after  the 
Restoration  Bishop  of  Durham;  and  on  November 
10,  the  first  attack  on  Laud  was  made  by  Sir  Edward 
Dering,  a  man  who  was  neither  a  Puritan  nor  a 
personal  enemy  of  the  Archbishop,  who  declared  that 
he  had  no  thought  of  revolution  in  Church  or  State. 

Williams  had  been  three  years  a  prisoner,  and 
Laud  was  generally  believed  to  have  been  the  chief 
instigator  of  this  punishment.  It  was  thought,  there- 
fore, that  he  might  be  made  an  instrument  for  the 
prosecution  of  Laud,  and  an  order  for  his  release 
was  procured  from  the  King.  Williams  immediately 
returned  to  his  duties  as  Dean  of  Westminster,  but 
showed  that  he  had  no  mind  to  serve  the  Puritans  or 
to  retaliate  upon  Laud.  Still  the  work  went  on. 
The  canons  made  in  the  late  Convocation  were  de- 
clared in  the  House  of  Commons  (December  16),  to 
be  "against  the  King's  prerogative,  the  fundamental 
laws  of  the  realm,  and  the  liberty  and  property  of 
the  subject ; "  and,  as  Laud  was  chiefly  responsible 


r.--" 


416  The  Anglican  Reformation,    , 

for  these  canons,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  in- 
quire into  all  his  previous  actions,  and  to  prepare  a 
bill  against  those  of  the  Convocation  who  had  sub- 
scribed the  canons.  On  the  same  day  a  lengthy 
document  was  presented  to  the  House  of  Lords  by 
the  Scotch  commissioners,  charging  Laud  and  Straf- 
ford with  similar  offences.  Two  days  later  (Decem- 
ber 18)  Mr.  Holies  appeared  before  the  Lords,  and  in 
the  name  of  the  Commons  accused  the  Archbishop 
of  high  treason,  upon  which  Laud  exclaimed  indig- 
nantly that  not  one  man  in  the  House  of  Commons 
did  in  his  heart  believe  it.  He  was  committed  to  the 
custody  of  the  Black  Rod,  and  on  the  1st  of  March 
in  the  following  year  sent  to  the  Tower. 

The  Archbishop  being  in  prison,  Convocation  be- 
came powerless,  and  the  work  against  the  Church 
went  on.  Commissioners  were  appointed  to  "de- 
molish and  remove  out  of  churches  and  chapels  all 
images,  altars  or  tables  turned  altarwise,  crucifixes, 
superstitious  pictures,  and  other  monuments  and 
relics  of  idolatr3^"  The  legality  of  such  a  proceed- 
ing was  highly  doubtful,  and  in  many  cases  the  ac- 
tion of  the  iconoclasts  was  resisted  by  the  clergy  and 
church  wardens. 

Another  serious  step  was  the  appointment  of  a 
Commission  (March  16),  to  consist  of  ten  earls,  ten 
barons,  and  ten  bishops,  who  might  call  in  divines 
for  consultation.  They  were  to  review  doctrines  and 
discipline,  not  only  in  regard  to  recent  innovations, 
but  with  respect  to  the  "  degrees  and  perfection  of 
the  Reformation  itself,"  in  other  words  to  consider 
whether  the  work  might  not  be  carried  further.     Of 


y..- 


Root  and  Branch  Bill.  417 


the  bishops  only  Williams,  Hall,  Morton,  and  Usher, 
who  had  come  from  Armagh  to  Carlisle,  seem  to 
have  attended.  They  condemned  canopies  over  the 
Holy  Table,  credence  tables,  and  candlesticks  on  the 
altar ;  and  they  confirmed  the  use  of  the  authorized 
version,  and  suggested  the  removal  of  the  prohibited 
times  of  marriage  from  the  Prayer  Book. 

But  a  bolder  move  was  made  when  (May  20)  a 
bill  was  introduced,  again  by  Sir  Edward  Dering, 
which  was  afterwards  known  as  the  "  Root  and 
Branch  Bill,"  providing  for  the  abolition  of  the 
bishop  and  all  his  officers,  and  also  of  deans  and 
chapters.  The  second  reading  was  carried  May  27  ; 
and  on  June  15  it  was  resolved  that  "deans  and 
chapters,  archdeacons,  prebendaries,  canons,  etc., 
should  be  utterly  abolished  and  taken  away  out  of 
the  Church."  But  this  was  further  than  the  mover 
had  intended  to  go.  Sir  E.  Dering  evidently  had 
not  considered  the  effect  of  his  bill,  for  he  declared 
himself  in  favor  of  bishops  whom  he  believed  to  be 
of  apostolical  permission,  if  not  of  apostolical  insti- 
tution. Other  members  joined  in  similar  expressions, 
proving  that  the  alliance  of  these  men  with  the  Pres- 
byterians was  hardly  of  their  own  choice. 

About  this  time  arose  the  famous  controversy  re- 
specting episcopacy  in  which  several  very  eminenu 
men  took  place.  Bishop  Hall  was  the  first  to  come 
forward  in  defence  of  his  order;  and  he  was  an- 
swered by  five  Puritan  writers  whose  initials  united 
formed  the  word  Smectymnus.  Their  work  was  an- 
swered by  Usher,  whilst  the  other  side  was  supported 
by  no  less  a  person  than  Milton.  Petitions  from 
AA 


418  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

both  sides  were  addressed  to  Parliament,  but  it  was 
not  clear  that  the  majority  were  in  favor  of  tl  3  abo- 
lition of  episcopacy.  The  Lords  would  not  consent 
to  the  expulsion  of  tlie  bishops  from  Parliament,  and 
the  Root  and  Braiich  Bill  had  not  become  law  at  the 
end  of  the  session. 

The  counsels  of  Laud  to  King  Charles  had  not 
always  been  wise  or  prudent;  but  his  course  was 
always  definite  and  consistent.  His  schemes  were 
wrecked  by  imprudence,  but  not  ever  by  vacillation. 
When  Charles  was  left  without  the  support  of  Laud, 
he  committed  almost  every  fault  in  government  that 
was  possible.  He  was  stubborn  when  he  ought  to 
have  yielded.  He  gave  way  when  he  ought  to  have 
stood  firm.  It  is  said  that  it  was  by  Bishop  Williams's 
advice  that  he  consented  to  the  death  of  Strafford ;  but 
nothing  can  be  urged  in  defence  of  such  a  crime. 
Strafford's  only  fault  was  absolute  loyalty  to  a  foolish 
and  self-willed  ruler.  In  the  same  spirit  of  weakness 
he  undertook  that  the  Long  Parliament  should  not 
be  dissolved  without  its  own  consent ;  whilst  in  Scot- 
land he  assented  to  a  bill  which  declared  that  **  the 
government  of  the  Church  by  bishops  was  repugnant 
to  the  Word  of  God;  that  the  prelates  were  enemies 
to  the  true  Protestant  religion ;  that  their  order  was 
to  be  suppressed,  and  their  lands  given  to  the  King." 
Well  might  Strafford  exclaim  :  "Put  not  your  trust 
in  princes ! "  Candid  readers  of  history  can  hardly 
wonder,  even  if  they  must  regret,  that  the  govern- 
ment of  Charles  was  an  utter  failure. 

If  the  English  people  could  have  trusted  the  King, 
all  might  have  been  changed.     During  the  first  ses- 


The  Grand  Remonstrance.  419 

sion  of  this  Parliament  many  concessions  had  been 
obtained.  The  courts  of  Star  Chamber  and  High 
Commission  had  been  abolished,  ship-money  had  been 
surrendered,  and  other  royal  privileges  given  up. 
15 ut  they  could  not  trust  the  King;  and  so,  when 
Parliament  assembled  in  October,  the  Commons  drew 
up  a  statement  known  as  the  Grand  Remonstrance 
in  whicli  they  set  forth  the  faults  of  the  King's  gov- 
ernment from  the  beginning.  The  statements  were 
consideriibly  exaggerated,  but  they  were  accepted  by 
the  Plouse.  When  they  came  to  the  consideration 
of  tlie  necessary  remedies,  however,  there  came  a 
divergence.  The  Puritan  leaders  proposed  that 
ministers  should  be  responsible  to  Parliament,  and 
that  church  matters  sliould  be  under  the  control  of 
an  assembly  of  divines  nominated  by  Parliament. 
But  Hyde,  Falkland  and  their  followers  saw  in  this 
only  the  establishment  of  a  Presbyterian  despotism, 
and  opposed  the  proposition  so  resolutely  that  the 
debate  was  continued  until  after  midnight.  The 
Puritan  side  triumphed  by  a  majority  of  eleven. 
Still  the  cause  of  the  King  was  not  yet  lost.  When 
he  returned  to  London,  November  25,  two  days  after 
the  debate  on  the  Grand  Remonstrance,  and  declared 
that  he  intended  to  govern  according  to  the  laws,  and 
would  maintain  the  Protestant  religion  as  it  had  been 
established  in  the  times  of  Elizabeth  and  his  father, 
he  was  enthusiastically  cheered  in  the  streets ;  but 
some  imprudent  actions  of  his  and  the  news  of  the 
rebellion  spreading  in  Ireland,  which  was  by  many 
attributed  to  the  influence  of  the  Queen,  excited 
fresh  anxiety  and  suspicion, 


I  '   ^l- 


420  21ie  Anylican  Reformation. 

The  bishops  became  the  special  object  of  the  popu- 
lar hatred,  and  a  demand  was  made  that  they  should 
be  expelled  from  the  House  of  Lords.  So  threaten- 
ing became  the  attitude  of  the  mob  that  on  Decem- 
ber 27j  the  bishops  made  their  escape  from  the  House, 
and  took  refuge  at  the  lodgings  of  Williams,  now 
Archbishop  of  York.  Williams  had  the  reputation 
of  being  a  man  well  versed  in  law,  and  at  his  sug- 
gestion the  bishops  drew  up  a  protest  to  the  Lords, 
declaring  all  the  proceedings  of  the  Upper  House, 
during  their  enforced  absence,  to  be  void.  It  ap- 
pears that,  in  doing  so,  the  bishops  were  within  their 
rights.  No  one  can  accuse  the  historian  Hallam  of 
undue  partiality  to  the  clerical  order ;  yet  he  declares 
that  this  protest  was  "  abundantly  justifiable  "  from 
a  legal  point  of  view.  But  many  things  which  are 
lawful  may  not  be  expedient.  The  Lords  were 
offended,  and  the  enemies  of  the  bishops  were  jubi- 
lant. 

The  bishops,  thirteen  in  number,  including  their 
leader.  Archbishop  Williams  of  York,  were  arraigned 
by  the  House  of  Commons  as  guilty  of  High  Treason 
— a  very  absurd  accusation,  yet  one  which  enabled 
their  accusers  provisionally  to  take  action  against 
them.  With  the  exception  of  Bishop  Hall  of  Nor- 
wich and  Bishop  Morton  of  Durham,  who  were  con- 
signed to  the  custody  of  the  Black  Rod,  all  the  bish- 
ops were  sent  to  the  Tower.  After  eighteen  days  of 
imprisonment  ten  were  released ;  but  on  February  6, 
1642,  they  were  deprived  of  their  authority,  and  ec- 
clesiastical jurisdiction  was  vested  in  a  committee  of 
the  House  of  Commons.    As  usual,  the  King,  left 


The  King^s   Concessions.  421 


to  his  own  judgment  and  action,  after  a  good  deal  of 
hesitation  and  with  great  unwillingness,  gave  his 
consent  to  the  measure.  It  has  been  urged,  in  his 
defence,  that  tliis  is  the  only  bill  to  the  prejudice  of 
the  Church  which  he  ever  sanctioned,  and  that  he 
did  so  by  the  persuasion  of  the  Queen,  who  cared 
nothing  for  the  bishops  of  the  English  Church,  and 
thought  by  this  means  to  ingratiate  herself  with  the 
Commons.  When  Laud  heard,  in  prison,  of  what 
had  been  done,  he  exclaimed :  "  God  be  merciful  to 
this  sinking  Church."  The  passing  of  this  bill,  says 
Clarendon,  "exceedingly  weakened  the  King's  party; 
not  only  as  it  perpetually  swept  away  so  considera- 
ble a  number  out  of  the  House  of  Peers,  which  were 
constantly  devoted  to  him,  but  as  it  made  impres- 
sion on  others  whose  minds  were  in  suspense,  and 
shaken  as  whan  foundations  are  dissolved." 

Although  we  are  little  concerned  here  with  the 
civil  history  of  the  period,  it  is  necessary  to  refer  to 
the  attempted  arrest  of  five  members  of  Parliament 
whom  the  King  charged  with  a  treasonable  corres- 
pondence with  the  Scots.  Foremost  among  these 
were  Pym  and  Hampden,  the  leaders  of  the  opposi- 
tion. As  the  Commons  showed  no  disposition  to 
surrender  the  accused,  the  King  proceeded  in  person 
to  the  House  of  Commons ;  but  the  men  had  fled  to 
the  city.  It  was  one  of  those  acts  of  the  King 
which  served  to  render  impossible  any  attempt  at 
reconciliation.  As  he  left  tlie  House,  cries  of  "Privi- 
lege "  arose  from  all  sides.  The  act  of  tlie  King  was 
regarded  not  as  an  endeavor  to  enforce  the  law,  but 
as  an  attempt  to  intimidate  the  House.    The  Com- 


422  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


mons  and  the  country  alike  resented  the  attempt. 
On  January  10,  1642,  Charles  left  Whitehall,  never 
to  return  until  he  was  brought  back  to  be  tried  for 
his  life.  On  the  same  day  the  five  members  were 
escorted  back  in  triumph  to  Westminster. 

Both  sides  now  prepared  for  war;  but  it  would 
lead  us  too  far  from  our  purpose  to  discuss  the  rights 
and  wrongs  of  tlie  conflict  of  King  and  Parliament, 
so  we  will  content  ourselves  by  following,  for  the 
most  part,  the  religious  history  of  the  period.  In  a 
proclamation  issued  soon  after  by  Parliament  they 
declared  tluit  "they  intended  a  due  and  necessary 
reformation  of  the  government  and  liturgy  of  the 
Church,  and  to  take  away  nothing  in  the  one  or  in 
the  other  but  what  should  be  evil  and  justly  offensive, 
or  at  least  unnecessary  and  burdensome  ;  and  for  the 
better  effecting  thereof,  speedily  to  have  consultation 
with  learned  and  godly  divines ;  and  because  that 
would  never  of  itself  attain  the  end  sought  therein, 
they  would  also  use  their  utmost  endeavors  to  estab- 
lish learned  and  preaching  ministers  with  a  good  and 
sufficient  maintenance  throughout  the  whole  King- 
dom." Here  was  clearly  an  expansion  of  the  system 
of  lecturers  who  were  as  dear  to  the  Puritan  heart, 
as  they  were  objectionable  to  the  ordinary  church- 
man. Many  of  them  had  ostentatiously  ignored  the 
Praye*  Book,  prefixing  to  their  sermons  Bible  read- 
ing, extempore  prayer,  and  metrical  hymns;  and 
Parliament  was  apparently  prepared  to  sanction  this 
kind  of  servic;6  in  place  of  the  established  ritual  of 
the  Church. 

How  far  the  Parliament  might  have  gone  in  this 


Scotch  Intervention.  423 


direction  in  the  way  of  natural  development  we  can- 
not tell,  as  they  were  not  left  to  work  out  their  own 
theories  by  themselves.  When  the  struggle  began 
between  the  King  and  Parliament,  the  latter  applied 
to  the  Scotch  who  had  more  than  once  taken  arms 
against  the  King  for  the  maintenance  of  tlieir  own 
form  of  religion.  The  Scotch  naturally  thought  that, 
as  the  Parliament  was  contending  against  the  same 
kind  of  system  which  they  had  rejected  by  force, 
so  it  was  reasonable  that  they  should  have  a  com- 
mon understanding.  Quite  naturally,  therefore,  they 
made  their  cooperation  conditional  upon  the  agree- 
ment that  there  should  be  "  one  Confession  of  Faith, 
one  Directory  of  Worship,  one  public  Catechism,  and 
one  form  of  Church  government,  and  tliat  prelacy 
should  be  plucked  up  root  and  branch,  as  a  plant 
which  God  hath  not  planted." 

As  the  House  of  Commons  had  already  refused  to 
pass  a  bill  embodying  principles  ahnost  identical 
with  these,  they  were  hardly  prepared  for  such  a 
proposal ;  but  there  seemed  little  choice  before  them. 
Accordingly,  tlie  Root  and  Branch  Bill  was  again 
introduced  into  the  Commons  and  passed,  and  after 
a  delay  of  four  months  was  adopted  by  the  Lords. 
The  proof,  as  Neal  remarks,  that  the  Parliament 
was  not  inclined  to  this  measure,  was  the  provision 
that  it  should  not  come  into  effect  for  a  year; 
and  it  would  never  have  taken  effect  at  all,  if  they 
could  have  come  to  some  accommodation  with  the 
King. 

It  was  only  when  the  King's  side  seemed  to  be 
gaining  the  upper  hand  that  the  Parliament  resolved 


424  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


to  give  ill  to  the  demands  of  the  Scots,  md  passed 
an  ordinance  (June  18,  1648)  "  for  the  calling  of  an 
assembly  of  learned  and  godly  divines,  and  others,  to 
be  consulted  with  by  the  Parliament  for  settling  the 
government  and  liturgy  of  the  Church  of  England, 
and  for  vindicating  and  clearing  the  doctrine  of  the 
said  Church  from  false  aspersions  and  interpreta- 
tions." This  was  the  beginning  of  the  famous  West- 
minster Assembly  from  which  emanated  the  docu- 
ments which  have  ever  since  been  regarded  as  the 
standards  of  the  Presbyterian  churches,  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  and  the  Longer  and  Shorter  Catechisms. 
They  were  to  meet  on  the  1st  of  July,  1643,  and  to 
continue  their  sessions  until  they  were  dissolved  by 
Parliament.  The  subjects  with  which  they  should 
deal  would  be  prescribed  by  one  or  both  of  the 
Houses  of  Parliament.  They  were  to  consist  of  one 
hundred  and  thirty -one  divines,  and  thirty  laymen  of 
whom  ten  should  be  Lords  and  twenty  Commoners ; 
and  Commissioners  from  Scotland  were  to  sit  with 
them.  The  assembly  opened  at  Westminster  on  the 
1st  of  July,  sixty-nine  divines  being  present. 

Some  preliminary  work  was  done  by  the  English 
members,  but  the  real  business  of  the  assembly  began 
after  the  arrival  of  the  Scottish  Commissioners.  They 
had  been  instructed  to  insist  upon  the  acceptance  by 
the  English  of  the  "  Covenant "  as  the  condition  of 
Scotch  cooperation.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that 
such  a  proposition  was  most  distasteful  to  a  large 
number  of  the  English  members  of  the  assembly. 
However,  it  was  a  question  of  accepting  tlie  Cove- 
nant or  renouncing  the  help  of  the  Scottish  army, 


Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  425 


and  the  need  of  the  Parliament  was  great.  They 
agreed  therefore  to  the  requirement  that  they  should 
accept  "  the  reformation  of  religion  in  the  Church  of 
England  according  to  the  example  of  the  best  re- 
formed churches,"  that  is  to  say, — the  constitution  of 
the  Church  of  England  was  to  become  Presbyterian 
in  doctrine,  discipline,  and  ritual.  Sir  Harry  Vane, 
who  saw  the  danger  to  religious  liberty  in  such  an 
engagement,  managed  to  get  added  the  words,  "  and 
according  to  the  Word  of  God."  Such  an  addition 
could  hardly  be  objected  to  by  those  who  declined  to 
recognize  any  source  of  authority  save  the  Bible ;  but 
it  left  it  open  for  any  one  to  form  his  own  judgment 
as  to  what  was  or  was  not  "  according  to  the  Word 
of  God." 

The  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  was  subscribed 
by  the  assembly  and  the  House  of  Commons  Sep- 
tember 25,  1643 ;  and  it  was  ordered  to  be  read  on 
the  following  Sunday  in  all  the  churches  in  London. 
It  was  further  enacted  that  every  person  in  England 
above  the  age  of  eighteen  should  take  the  Covenant 
on  February  2, 1644.  A  more  tyrannical  proceeding 
could  hardly  be  imagined ;  nor  one  more  at  variance 
with  the  pretensions  of  a  Parliament,  which  professed 
to  be  the  defender  of  liberty  and  the  rights  of  con- 
science. Reasonable  men  saw  at  once  that  English 
churchmen,  of  whatever  complexion,  could  not  take 
this  Covenant  "  without  injury  and  perjury  to  them- 
selves;" and  even  a  stiff  Presbyterian  like  Richard 
Baxter  declared,  in  opposing  the  requirement,  that 
he  could  "never  judge  it  seemly  for  one  believing  in 
God  to  play  fast  and  loose  with  a  dreadful  oath."    It 


426  The  Amjlican  Reformation. 


is  said  that  the  oath  was  not  imposed  upon  many  of 
the  Episcopal  Clergy  who  were  known  to  be  favor- 
able to  the  Parliament,  whilst  it  formed  an  easy  and 
convenient  method  of  ejecting  from  their  benefices 
those  "  malignants  "  wliom  it  was  thought  necessary 
to  dispossess. 

Various  abuses  arose  out  of  this  state  of  things. 
Hundreds  of  parishes  were  left  without  incumbents, 
so  that  the  churches  were  taken  possession  of  by 
wild  enthusiasts  without  education  or  settled  prin- 
ciples, and,  to  the  great  scandal  of  the  better  kind 
of  men,  the  divines  of  the  assembly  not  only  took 
the  best  of  the  vacated  benefices  for  themselves,  but 
held  several  of  them  together.  As  the  Puritan 
Milton  remarks,  "  the  most  part  of  them  were  such 
as  had  preached  and  cried  down  with  great  show  of 
zeal  the  avarice  and  pluralities  of  bishops  and  prel- 
ates, and  one  cure  of  souls  was  a  full  employment 
for  one  spiritual  pastor,  how  able  soever.  Yet  they 
wanted  not  boldness,  to  the  ignominy  and  scandal 
of  their  pastor-like  profession,  to  seize  into  their 
hands  sometimes  two  or  more  of  the  best  livings, 
collegiate  masterships  in  the  Universities,  rich  lec- 
tures in  the  city,  setting  sail  to  all  winds  that  might 
blow  gain  into  their  covetous  bosoms." 

The  manner  of  conducting  divine  service  became 
very  uncertain.  Those  who  attempted  to  continue 
the  use  of  the  Prayer  Book  were  interrupted  and  in- 
sulted. Others  followed  the  guidance  of  a  "  Di- 
rectory "  drawn  up  by  the  Westminster  assembly 
on  the  basis  of  Cartwiight's.  This  Directory,  after 
being  approved  by  the  General  Assembly   of    the 


Tyranny  of  the  Puritans.  427 


Churcli  of  Scotland,  was  prescribed  for  use  in  Eng- 
land, January  3,  1645.  The  preface  to  the  book 
set  forth  the  reasons  for  the  changes  made,  in  that 
the  English  Liturgy  had  been  an  offence  not  only 
"  to  many  of  the  godly  at  home,"  but  to  the  reformed 
churches  abroad.  It  had  been  made  an  idol,  had 
encouraged  the  Papists,  had  produced  "  an  idle  and 
unedifying  ministry,"  and  so  forth.  An  order  fol- 
lowed imposing  penalties  on  any  who  should  use  the 
Prayer  Book  either  publicly  or  privately,  five  pounds 
for  the  first  offence,  ten  pounds  for  the  second,  and 
for  the  third  a  year's  imprisonment.  All  this  re- 
minds us  of  the  "  liberty  "  obtained  by  the  French 
Revolution,  and  Madame  Roland's  comment  on  the 
same. 

Looking  back  upon  those  doings  from  the  experience 
of  recent  times,  and  marking  how  nearly  all  the 
more  higlily  educated  of  the  Clergy  of  the  West- 
minster Confession  have  endeavored  to  make,  at 
least,  a  partial  return  to  the  type  of  worship  repre- 
sented by  tlie  English  Prayer  Book,  we  find  it  diffi- 
cult to  understand  its  abandonment  throughout  the 
country,  except  that  to  numbers  of  the  people  its 
use  was  associated  with  the  despotism  of  Charles  and 
Laud.  The  new  system,  however,  did  not  take  per- 
manent hold  of  the  sympathies  of  the  people.  Even 
the  Puritan  historian  testifies  that  "  it  proved  not  to 
the  satisfaction  of  any  one  party  of  Christians." 

The  Clergy  were  soon  between  two  fires.  The 
King  issued  a  proclamation  from  Oxford  (November 
13,  1645)  condemning  and  forbidding  the  use  of  the 
Directory,    and    ordering    the    Book    of    Common 


428  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


Prayer  to  be  used  under  penalties  in  case  the  Di- 
rectory should  take  its  place.  Some  of  the  Clergy 
knew  the  contents  of  the  Prayer  Book  so  well,  that 
they  were  accustomed  to  recite  the  greater  part  of 
the  service  without  a  book. 

But  there  soon  came  to  be  serious  divisions  in  the 
Puritan  ranks.  At  the  Westminster  Assembly,  if 
the  majority  were  not  certainly  Presbyterian,  it  was 
at  least  finally  agreed  to  accept  that  form  of  Church 
government;  and  at  that  time  the  Brownists  or  In- 
dependents were  few  in  number.  It  is  said  that 
there  were  only  five  in  the  assembly,  known  as  the 
five  Dissenting  Brethren,  who  held  the  views  which 
have  been  noticed  as  those  of  the  Brownists  under 
Queen  Elizabeth.  These  began  now  to  be  known  as 
Independents,  holding  that  "  every  particular  con- 
gregation of  Christians  has  an  entire  and  complete 
power  of  jurisdiction  over  its  members,  to  be  exer- 
cised by  the  elders  thereof  within  itself."  Some  of 
the  most  considerable  men  of  the  Puritan  party, 
such  as  Cromwell  and  Vane,  came  to  adhere  to  this 
sect ;  and  in  one  respect  they  were  honorably  dis- 
tinguished from  Presbyterians  and  even  from  Epis- 
copalians in  preaching,  although  not  always  practis- 
ing, the  doctrine  of  liberty  and  religious  toleration. 
In  one  respect,  at  least,  they  were  more  liberal  than 
tlie  Presbyterians,  that  they  demanded  no  profession 
of  faith,  nor  did  they  interfere  with  private  convic- 
tions, so  long  as  no  attempt  was  made  to  give  public 
expression  to  them.  It  was  a  very  qualified  kind  of 
liberty,  no  doubt ;  but  it  was  more  than  other  denom- 
inations of  Christians  would  sanction  at  that  time. 


l",  VT 


The   Independents.  429 


It  was  difficult  for  Presbyterians  and  Independ- 
ents to  get  along  together ;  and  this  was  found  out 
when  they  met  to  devise  some  scheme  of  ordination 
and  a  system  of  government,  a  highly  necessary 
matter,  now  that  all  kinds  of  men  were  climbing  up 
into  the  sheepfold,  to  minister.  When  the  Presby- 
terians brought  their  system  before  Parliament,  de- 
claring their  government  to  be  of  divine  appoint- 
ment, and  asking  for  something  like  absolute  powers 
of  government,  they  found  considerable  opposition 
not  only  from  Independents  like  Cromwell,  but 
from  other  members  of  the  House  who  did  not 
choose  to  surrender  the  power  of  Parliament  to  a  re- 
ligious body.  Something  like  a  modified  Presbyte- 
rianism  was  adopted  June  6,  1646  ;  but  the  growth 
of  Independency  made  it  impossible  to  give  general 
effect  to  this  system.  Reference  has  already  been 
made  to  the  doctrinal  standards  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly.  The  Confession  of  Faith  was  presented 
to  Parliament  in  December,  16-16. 

The  Clergy  had  a  very  hard  time  from  the  begin- 
ning of  the  Long  Parliament.  They  were  not  only 
deprived  of  their  means  of  livelihood,  but  in  many 
cases  their  goods  were  seized,  and  themselves  put  in 
prison.  Charges  of  all  kinds  were  invented  against 
them,  sometimes  of  gross  immorality,  which  were 
generally  fabrications,  and  very  commonly  such  as 
bowing  at  the  name  of  Jesus,  asking  the  communi- 
cants to  come  up  to  the  rails  instead  of  administer- 
ing to  them  in  their  seats,  and  the  like.  All  such 
cases  came  before  a  Grand  Committe  of  Religion 
appointed  by  Parliament,  early  in  its  history  (No- 


430  .    The  Anglican  Reformation. 

vember  6,  1640)  ;  and  often  there  was  no  pretence 
of  justice  or  equity  in  the  treatment  of  the  accused. 
A  conaraittee  consisting  of  thoroughly  uneducated 
men  often  did  not  hesitate  to  judge  the  most  difficult 
questions  in  divinity.  The  language  used  in  speak- 
ing of  the  Clergy  is  almost  incredibly  coarse  and  re- 
volting. It  would  be  superfluous  to  dwell  up(>n 
these  persecutions  which  are  set  forth  at  length  in 
Walker's  "  Sufferings  of  the  Clergy." 

The  bishops  were  treated  nearly  as  badly  as  the 
inferior  Clergy.  There  was  probably  no  bishop  on 
the  bench  who  was  more  popular  with  the  Puritans 
than  Joseph  Hall,  first  of  Exeter,  and  afterwards  of 
Norwich.  Yet  as  soon  as  the  ordinance  for  the 
sequestration  of  the  "  malignant "  Clergy  came  forth 
(April,  1643),  all  his  goods  were  se.zed ;  they  did  not 
leave,  he  said  "  so  much  as  a  dozen  of  trenchers,  or 
my  children's  pictures."  Not  only  were  his  goods 
sold,  but  he  was  required  to  pay  the  arrears  of  rents 
which  he  had  before  forgiven  to  his  tenants. 

But  at  last  there  was  one  brought  to  trial  whom 
none  of  the  Puritans  were  inclined  to  spare.  Yet 
there  was  a  great  difficulty  in  knowing  how  to  pro- 
ceed. For  Laud,  however  narrow  and  perverse,  was 
a  persecutor  on  precisely  the  same  principles  as  those 
on  which  his  adversaries  acted  when  they  came  to 
power,  and  the  charge  of  treason  was  absurd.  Laud 
petitioned  in  vain  that  he  should  be  brought  to  trial ; 
and  he  was  forced  to  remain  in  the  Tower  for  three 
years,  knowing  all  the  evil  that  was  being  wrought, 
and  powerless  to  act  or  even  to  advise.  He  was  also 
subjected  to  various  insults  during  his  imprisonment. 


Trial  of  laud.  431 


Prynne,  who  had  suffered  under  Laud,  was  appointed 
to  conduct  tlie  case  against  him ;  and,  entering  his 
apartment  in  the  Tower,  rifled  his  pockets  and  liis 
trunk,  carried  off  his  papers,  his  diary,  which  he 
garbled  and  used  unfairly,  and  his  book  of  private 
devotions — written,  as  well  as  his  diary  by  his  own 
hand. 

After  many  insults  and  delays  the  Archbishop  ap- 
peared at  the  bar  of  the  House  of  Lords,  November 
13,  1643 ;  but  there  were  further  delays,  and  it  was 
March  12, 1644,  before  the  trial  really  began.  After 
listening  to  a  lengthy  speech  of  accusation.  Laud 
asked  leave  to  speak.  He  repudiated  with  indigna- 
tion the  charge  of  attempting  to  overthrow  the  law, 
declaring  that,  as  he  was  born  and  bred  in  the 
Church  of  England,  so  he  had  faithfully  continued 
in  the  same,  and  had  labored  for  the  external  wor- 
ship of  God,  "  too  mucli  slighted  in  most  parts  of  this 
kingdom  ; "  but  that  in  this  he  had  no  thought  of  en- 
couraging popery ;  and  on  this  he  dwelt  at  some 
length.  The  Archbishop  was  treated  with  great  in- 
solence by  the  attendants  of  the  court  and  others, 
who  could  not  bear  to  hear  his  defence  of  himself; 
and  he  seems  to  have  endured  all  with  much  patience 
and  forbearance.  The  trial  was  dragged  out  to  great 
length  simply  because  it  was  impossible  to  find  him 
guilty  of  treason  by  any  law  new  or  old,  or  even  by 
the  "  tyrannical  traditions  of  Parliament."  Six  times 
in  one  month  he  was  brought  up,  apparently  for  no 
other  reason  than  to  expose  him  to  the  insults  of  the 
mob.  His  diary,  mutilated  and  garbled,  was  used 
against  him,  and  every  trifling  incident  in  his  life 


482  2^he  Anglican  Reformation. 

which  could  be  tortured  into  an  appearance  of  evil, 
was  brought  forward.  Of  course  the  old  charges 
about  the  Holy  Table  and  the  ceremonial  of  divine 
service  were  brought  up. 

The  trial  ended  July  29,  1644,  after  lasting  three 
months,  during  which  time  he  had  spoken  twenty 
times  in  his  defence.  He  was  allowed  to  recapitulate 
on  September  21,  and  his  counsel  were  heard,  Octo- 
ber 11,  on  legal  questions.  The  Archbishop's  bear- 
ing impressed  even  his  enemies.  "  To  give  him  his 
due,"  said  Prynne,  "he  made  as  full,  as  gallant,  and 
as  pithy  a  defence  of  so  bad  a  cause,  and  spoke  so 
much  for  himself  as  it  was  possible  for  the  wit  of 
man  to  invent,  and  that  with  so  much  art,  sophistry, 
vivacity,  oratory,  audacity,  and  confidence,  without 
the  least  blush  of  acknowledgment  of  guilt  in  any- 
thing, as  argued  him  rather  obstinate  than  innocent, 
impudent  than  penitent,  a  far  better  orator  and 
sophister  than  Protestant  or  Christian,  yea,  a  truer 
son  of  the  Church  of  Rome  than  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land." When  it  is  remembered  that  this  is  the  tes- 
timony of  an  envenomed  adversary,  thirsting  for  his 
blood,  we  may  understand  how  much  it  means. 

Laud  was  then  summoned  to  the  bar  of  the  House 
of  Commons,  where  he  was  informed  that  he  was  at- 
tainted of  High  Treason.  He  defended  himself  with 
great  power  (November  11)  ;  but  they  did  not  want 
defence  or  argument.  Those  in  power  had  deter- 
mined to  put  him  to  death,  although  killing  in  such  a 
case  was  murder;  and  the  bill  of  attainder  passed, 
November  13.  The  peers  held  out  for  a  time.  At 
last  six  of  them  agreed  with  the  Commons  (January 


Death  of  Laud.  433 


4,  lt545)  and  on  the  10th  of  January  he  was  beheaded 
on  Tower  Hill.  Ho  was  sevent3'^-two  years  of  age. 
Laud  was  thoroughly  honest  and  consistent,  but  he 
was  impatient  and  irascible,  and  had  no  gift  of  con- 
ciliation. When  it  is  added  that  he  had  adopted,  in 
a  time  of  revolution,  extreme  absolutist  doctrines  as 
to  the  government  of  Church  and  State,  and  had 
striven  to  give  effect  to  them,  it  can  be  understood 
how  he  had  made  so  many  enemies.  But  his  execu- 
tion was  a  crime. 

The  work  of  levelling  was  carried  on.  In  June, 
1646,  Oxford  surrendered  to  the  Parliament,  and 
commissioners  were  appointed  to  visit  the  University 
and  ejected  from  the  colleges  about  six  hundred 
members  and  all  the  heads  except  two.  At  this 
time  the  Civil  War  virtually  came  to  an  end ;  and 
Charles  chose  to  give  himself  up  to  the  Scots  rather 
than  to  the  Parliament.  If  he  would  have  consented 
to  establish  Pxesbyterianism,  they  would  have  stood 
by  him  ;  but  this  he  refused  to  do ;  and  it  must  be 
remembered  to  his  credit.  It  is  no  part  of  our  busi- 
ness to  follow  the  various  incidents  which  occurred 
during  the  next  two  years.  On  the  1st  of  January, 
1649,  the  Commons  proposed  to  appoint  a  High 
Court  of  Justice  to  try  the  King ;  but  the  Lords  re- 
fused to  take  part.  On  the  fourth  the  Commons 
declared  that,  as  representing  the  people,  they  had 
supreme  power  without  the  Lords ;  and  on  the  9th  a 
special  High  Court  of  Justice  was  constituted  by  a 
mere  fragment  of  the  House.  Many  refused  to  be 
members  of  the  court.  Of  one  hundred  and  thirty- 
five  who  were  named,  only  sixty-seven  were  present 

BB 


434  The  Augltcan  Reformation. 

when  the  trial  began.  In  such  circumstances  only 
one  result  could  be  arrived  at,  that  which  was  pre- 
determined. He  was  condemned,  sentenced  to  death, 
and  on  January  30,  1649,  he  was  executed  in  front 
of  tha  Palace  of  Whitehall.  It  is  needless  to  dwell 
at  length  upon  a  scene  so  often  described,  or  upon 
the  calm  dignity  of  the  sufferer. 

"He  nothing  common  did,  or  mean 
Upon  that  memorable  scene." 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 

THE  COMMONWEALTH. 

HE  state  of  religion  after  the  death  of  the 
King  became  more  and  more  anarchical. 
"  Liberty  of  Prophesying  '*  was  granted  to 
every  form  of  belief  except  Anglicanism 
and  Romanism.  Presbyterianism  had  been  estab- 
lished by  the  Parliament  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Westminster  Assembly ;  but  there  was  no  authority 
to  enforce  the  system.  The  rights  of  patrons  were 
ignored,  and  incumbents  came  to  be  chosen  in 
large  measures  by  the  inhabitants  of  the  parish. 
These  might  be  Presbyterians  or  Independents  or 
members  of  other  sects  that  were  springing  up  ;  and 
sometimes,  when  the  incumbent  was  not  approved 
by  the  parishioners,  a  separatist  would  hold  services 
in  private  houses. 

The  requirement  of  the  signature  of  the  Covenant 
having  been  found  to  be  impracticable,  the  Parlia- 
ment hpd  substituted  a  declaration  called  the  "  En- 
gagement," which  merely  called  upon  all  who  min- 
istered to  swear  that  they  "  would  be  true  and  faith- 
ful to  the  government  established,  without  King  and 
House  of  Peers."  Many  of  the  Church  Party  thought 
it  lawful  and  expedient  to  take  the  Engagement, 
seeing  little  prospect  of  the  restoration  of  the  mon- 
archy. To  the  Presbyterians  the  arrangement  was 
abhorrent,  as  doing  away,  in   reality,  with   all   re- 

435 


436  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

ligious  tests  and  tending  to  make  the  Independent  or 
congregational  system  supreme.  Even  Episcopa- 
lians might  now  mini*?ter  as  of  old,  if  only  they  did 
not  visibly  use  the  Prayer  Book  or  speak  against  the 
existing  order  of  things. 

Some  of  the  Clergy  regarded  the  acceptance  of  the 
Engagement  as  unlawful  and  dangerous ;  yet  those 
who  conformed  and  used  the  contents  of  the  Prayer 
Book  from  memojy  were  certainly  helping  to  keep 
alive  the  spirit  of  attachment  to  the  Church  and  her 
services.  Thus  Evelyn  tells  us  of  orthodox  men 
who  got  into  the  pulpits,  and  how  his  child  was 
christened  and  his  wife  churched  in  his  library,  be- 
cause the  parish  minister  durst  not  have  used  the 
services  of  the  church  to  which  he  had  always  ad- 
hered. 

Cromwell,  with  all  his  love  of  liberty,  had  a  deep 
sense  of  order;  and  determined  to  put  a  stop  to  the 
prevalent  lawlessness  by  the  appointment  of  a  body 
of  commissioners,  called  "  Triers,"  who  should  de- 
cide as  to  the  fitness  of  men  to  be  ministers  of 
the  word  of  God.  The  ordinance  by  which  this  new 
arrangement  was  introduced  (March  20,  1654)  is,  in 
various  respects,  of  great  interest.  It  set  forth  that, 
in  consequence  of  the  lack  of  order  for  sometime 
past,  **  many  weak,  scandalous,  popish,  and  ill- 
affcv..''ed  persons  had  intruded  themselves "  into 
livings;  and  therefore  it  was  appointed  that,  for  the 
future  (the  provision  was  also  made  retrospective  for 
a  year),  any  person  appointed  to  a  benefice  or  lec- 
tureship should  be  approved  by  these  commissioners 
who  were  not  only  to  judge  of  his  character  and  his 


The  Triers.  437 


learning,  but  also  "  of  the  grace  of  God  in  him,"  and 
his  fitness  to  preach  the  Gospel.  One  result  hoped 
for  from  the  appointment  of  this  commission  was  the 
removal  of  the  Episcopalians,  since  the  Triers  were 
told  not  to  give  admission  to  any  ministers  until 
they  should  have  experience  of  their  "  conformity 
and  submission  to  the  present  government,  his  High- 
ness and  the  Council."  The  candidates  were  often 
required  to  give  an  account  of  their  spiritual  ex- 
perience and  of  the  evidences  of  their  conversion 
before  they  were  accepted. 

Other  commissioners  were  appointed  in  the  same 
year  for  the  ejection  of  "scandalous  ministers." 
But  the  English  love  of  order  began  to  assert  it- 
self against  the  prevalent  disorder,  and  a  leaning 
towards  the  strictness  of  Presbyterian  government 
was  displayed.  Moreover  the  Parliame^nt  (the  first 
Parliament  in  the  Protectorate  be  it  remembered) 
began  to  insist  on  changes  which  would  greatly 
limit  the  power  of  the  Protector,  and  give  the 
country  at  large  an  opportunity  of  expressing  its 
real  mind.  This  was  the  last  thing  thr';  Cromwell 
wanted.  The  monarchy  had  been  destroyed  by  a 
Parliament  which  was  only  a  "  Rump,"  the  majority 
of  the  English  people,  at  least,  were  opposed  to  the 
new  system,  and  Cromwell  had  no  mind  to  be  got 
rid  of.  He  therefore  required  the  members  to  sign 
an  acknowledgment  of  the  government  as  settled  in 
a  single  person  and  in  Parliament,  and  turned  out 
all  who  refused  to  sign.  As  those  who  remained 
determined  to  carry  out  their  plans,  he  dissolved 
Parliament. 


438  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

In  the  judgment  of  the  Puritans  the  restrictions 
upon  the  church  clergy  were  insufficient ;  and  ac- 
cordingly attempts  were  made  to  punish  those  who, 
in  church  service,  employed  any  parts  of  the  Prayer 
Book.  One  of  those  charged  with  this  offence  was 
Peacock,  the  famous  oriental  scholar ;  and  he  would 
have  been  ejected  from  his  rectory  but  for  the  inter- 
position of  the  celebrated  Independent  divine,  John 
Owen.  Another  case  was  that  of  Mr.  Gunning  who 
held  a  service  in  London  on  Christmas  Day,  1657,  at 
which  Evelyn  was  present.  During  the  adminis- 
tration of  Holy  Communion  the  chapel  was  sur- 
rounded by  soldiers  and  all  the  congregation  made 
prisoners.  The  soldiers  did  not  interfere  until  the 
people  went  up  to  receive  the  sacrament ;  but  then, 
says  Evelyn,  "  they  held  their  muskets  against  us  as 
if  they  would  have  shot  us  at  the  altar."  It  was 
therefore  with  the  greatest  difficulty  that  the  or- 
dinances of  the  Church  were  continued.  The 
Clergy  who  had  refused  to  conform  were  almost 
starved,  and  the  continuance  of  men  in  holy  orders 
was  secured  by  young  men  being  sent  to  the  Univer- 
sities to  be  educated,  and  then  being  brought  to  one 
of  the  remaining  bishops  for  ordination.  This  was, 
of  course,  done  in  secret. 

The  death  of  Oliver  Cromwell,  September  3, 1658, 
seemed  to  promise  better  things  for  the  Church, 
which  for  some  time  were  not  realized.  The  Long 
Parliament,  or  rather  the  so-called  Kump  met  again 
in  1659 ;  but  the  contention  between  them  and  the 
army  began  again,  and  Monk,  who  was  in  command 
of   the  forces  in  Scotland,  crossed  the  border  and 


i 


Declaration  of  Breda.  489 

was  joined  by  Fairfax  at  York.  Monk  soon  dis- 
covered that  the  Rump  was  getting  to  be  detested  by 
all  parties,  and  he  gave  them  to  understand  that  it 
was  time  to  have  a  new  Parliament.  On  February 
26,  the  Presbyterian  members  who  had  been  turned 
out  by  Pride's  Purge  were  brought  back ;  and  on 
March  16,  the  Long  Parliament  gave  that  assent  to 
its  own  dissolution  without  which  it  maintained  it 
could  not  legally  be  dissolved. 

There  could  now  be  little  doubt  as  to  the  future 
course  of  events.  On  April  4th  Charles  signed  the 
"  Declaration  of  Breda  ;  offering  a  general  pardon  to 
all  except  those  specially  exempted  by  Parliament,  and 
promising  to  secure  confiscated  estates  to  their  new 
owners  on  such  terms  as  Parliament  might  approve. 
"  Because,"  he  said,  "  the  passion  and  uncharitable- 
ness  of  the  times  have  produced  several  opinions 
in  religion  by  which  men  are  engaged  in  parties  and 
animosities  against  each  other,  which,  when  they 
shall  hereafter  unite  in  a  freedom  of  conversation, 
will  be  composed  or  better  understood,  we  do  declare 
a  liberty  to  tender  consciences,  and  that  no  man 
ahall  be  disquieted  or  called  in  question  for  differences 
of  opinion  in  matters  of  religion  which  do  not  dis- 
turb the  peace  of  the  Kingdom ;  and  that  we  shall 
be  ready  to  consent  to  such  an  Act  of  Parliament  as, 
upon  mature  deliberation,  shall  be  offered  to  us  for 
the  full  granting  that  indulgence." 

It  was  brought  as  a  reproach  against  the  King  that 
on  this  and  other  occasions  he  made  promises  which 
were  not  kept.  There  are  two  answers  to  this  com- 
plaint.    In  the  first  place,  Charles  made  it  clear  that 


440  The  Anylican  Reformation. 

what  was  to  be  done  must  be  done  through  the  Par- 
liament. Moreover,  in  regard  to  some  other  prom- 
ises he  said  more  than  he  had  the  power  of  carrying 
out.  There  seems  no  reason  to  doubt  the  new 
King's  willingness  to  fulfil  all  the  expectations  which 
he  had  aroused  ;  but  he  had  no  mind  to  quarrel  with 
his  Parliament,  and  he  would  have  accomplished  no 
good  by  doing  so. 

The  Declaration  of  Breda  reached  the  English 
Parliament  May  1,  and  was  received  with  unanimous 
approval,  followed  by  the  resolution  that  "  accord- 
ing to  the  ancient  and  fundamental  laws  of  this 
Kingdom,  the  Government  is,  and  ought  to  be,  by 
Kings,  Lords,  and  Commons."  It  was  a  strange  end- 
ing to  the  episode  of  tlie  Commonwealth.  Charles 
and  Laud  had  made  England  Puritan  or  practically 
so ;  the  great  Oliver,  and  his  Ironsides,  and  his  Ma- 
jor-Generals  had  made  Puritanism  nearly  as  offensive 
as  Mary  and  Philip  had  made  Romanism ;  and 
Charles  II.  and  the  Church  of  England  had  oppor- 
tunities such  as  are  accorded  to  few  rulers  and  few 
institutions.  If  there  were  many  faults  in  this  age, 
it  was  also  distinguished  by  many  great  scholars, 
thinkers,  theologians.  It  brings  before  us,  at  least, 
what  may  be  called  the  last  act  in  the  great  Drama 
of  the  Reformation ;  and  those  who  believe  in  the 
providential  government  of  the  Church  and  the 
nation  will  feel  called  upon  to  study  that  epoch  with 
attention  and  reverence. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 

THE  WORK  OF  THE   RESTORATION. 

HARLES  II.  entered  London  on  his 
thirtieth  birthday,  May  29,  1660;  and 
never  was  a  monarch  greeted  with  a  more 
enthusiastic  reception  on  his  accession  to 
the  throne.  One  of  the  most  important  questions 
before  the  King  and  the  people  was  the  settlement  of 
religion  ;  and  at  first  tlie  Presbyterians  entertained 
great  expectations  of  the  ascendency  of  their  own 
system. 

When  the  Parliament  decreed  the  King's  restora- 
tion, they  sent  Commissioners  to  the  Hague  to  es- 
cort him  back,  and  a  body  of  Presbyterian  divines 
went  with  them,  to  urge  the  claims  of  their  consti- 
tution. The  Scotch  ministers  also  wrote  and  re- 
minded him  of  his  having  taken  the  Covenant,  a 
memory  not  likely  to  bring  pleasant  reflections  to 
his  Majesty  at  any  time  ;  and  the  Presbyterians  went 
so  far  as  to  express  the  confident  hope  that  he  would 
not  allow  the  use  of  the  Prayer  Book  and  the  sur- 
plice, even  in  his  own  chapel.  They  soon  found  that 
they  had  gone  too  far,  and  lowered  their  tone.  But 
it  also  became  manifest  that  the  country  was  no  more 
on  their  side  than  the  King.  While  professing,  un- 
der Charles  I.,  to  be  the  advocates  of  religious  liberty, 
they  had  inaugurated  a  despotism  much  more  op- 

441 


442  The  Anglican  Reformation. 


pressive.  Even  Milton  dechired  that  Presbyter  was 
only  "  Old  Priest  writ  large  ;  "  and  the  country  had 
made  the  same  discovery.  One  who  was  employed 
at  this  time  to  represent  the  Presbyterian  interest  in 
London,  reported,  "I  find  the  Presbyterian  cause 
wholly  given  up  and  lost." 

No  immediate  attempt  was  made  to  dislodge  the 
Presbyterian  and  Independent  ministers.  The  King 
even  chose  some  of  his  chaplains  from  them  and  had 
them  to  preach  before  him.  He  professed  himself 
eager  for  unity  and  requested  them  to  acquaint  him 
with  the  changes  which  they  desired  in  the  services 
of  the  Church.  Most  of  them  found  no  fault  with 
the  Articles ;  but  many  objected  to  episcopacy  and 
the  Liturgy ;  and  it  was  arranged  that  a  conference 
should  be  held  for  the  consideration  of  these  sub- 
jects. 

In  the  meantime,  however,  an  act  had  been 
passed  for  the  restoration  to  their  benefices  of  those 
who  had  been  driven  out  by  the  Long  Parliament  and 
Cromwell.  Those  of  the  Puritan  clergy  who  were 
occupying  the  places  of  incumbents  who  had  died 
were  allowed,  for  the  present,  to  retain  their  benefi- 
ces. The  services  of  the  Church  were  restored  in 
the  Cathedrals  and  in  the  Universities ;  and  the 
broken  ranks  of  the  Episcopate  were  filled  up. 
Juxon,  who  had  been  Bishop  of  London  before  the 
rebellion,  and  had  attended  King  Charles  upon  the 
scaffold,  was  now  made  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
although  he  was  near  the  end  of  his  long  life,  and 
had  little  strength  left  for  the  service  of  the  Church. 
Among  the  new  bishops  consecrated  the  names  of 


Conference  ivith  Puritans.  443 


Sandcrboii,  Sheldon,   Cosin,  aud   Walton  should  be 
mentioned. 

And  now  it  became  necessary  to  consider  what 
concessions  should  be  made  to  the  Puritans,  who  had 
not  been  backward  in  making  known  their  griev- 
ances and  their  wishes.  Most  of  their  demands 
were  made  under  the  influence  of  Baxter,  a  devout 
and  learned  man,  but  crotchety  and  self-opinionated. 
To  an  episcopacy  limited  by  a  standing  counsel  of 
presbyters  the  Puritans  said  they  did  not  object; 
but  they  wanted  the  Liturgy  to  be  conformed  to 
Scripture  language ;  and  required  that  the  surplice 
and  other  "ceremonies"  should  be  abolished.  The 
church  divines  were  naturally  surprised  at  such  de- 
mands, considering  the  nature  of  the  previous  con- 
troversies between  themselves  and  their  opponents, 
and  what  had  been  the  issue  of  them.  They  were 
willing,  however,  to  have  a  revision  of  the  Prayer 
Book. 

A  conference  was  called  at  which  a  declaration  of 
the  King  was  read  to  the  two  parties  in  presence  of 
his  Majesty  at  Worcester  House,  the  residence  of 
Lord  Clarendon.  A  j^aper  was  there  produced  ask- 
ing for  toleration  for  Independents  and  Baptists,  and 
Lord  Clarendon  remarked  that  it  was  the  King's 
wish  that  a  clause  should  be  inserted  giving  liberty 
to  all  to  meet  for  religious  worship,  "  provided  they 
did  not  to  the  disturbance  of  the  peace,"  which  was 
no  more  than  had  been  promised  in  the  Proclamation 
of  Breda.  Suspicion  was  aroused  that  it  was  in- 
tended to  include  Romanists,  and  this  was  opposed 
by  Baxter.     The  declaration,  thus  considered,  was 


444  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

put  forth  October  26,  and  after  recognizing  the 
chiinas  of  tender  consciences  and  the  evils  of  divi- 
sions, promised  certain  reforms.  Among  these  were 
the  following :  a  large  increase  of  suffragan  bishops ; 
a  certain  number  of  presbyters  to  be  associated  with 
the  bishops  in  government;  lo  ensure  a  real  prepara- 
tion and  instruction  before  confirmation ;  to  make 
the  rural  dean  and  certain  assistants  a  body  for  set- 
tling disputes  in  each  deanery,  and  for  seeing  that 
the  clergy  performed  their  duties  aright ;  to  have  a 
revision  of  the  Liturgy ;  and  in  the  meantime  to 
allow  considerable  liberty  in  the  use  of  the  Prayer 
Book. 

When  the  declaration  was  brought  before  the  Con- 
vention Parliament,  they  refused  to  legalize  it,  al- 
though a  considerable  number  of  the  members  were 
Presbyterians.  When,  therefore,  a  new  Parliament  as- 
sembled, much  more  loyalist  and  churchly  in  its  sym- 
pathies, the  expectations  of  relief  on  the  part  of  the 
dissidents  could  not  have  been  very  high.  They  had, 
however,  been  promised  a  conference  at  which  they 
might  state  their  views,  and  a  royal  warrant  for  this 
was  issued  under  date,  March  25,  (1661).  Twelve 
bishops  and  twelve  Presbyterian  divines  were  in- 
vited, with  nine  assistants  on  each  side  from  whom 
the  places  of  the  others  should  be  supplied  in  case 
of  their  absence.  The  King  declared  his  own  esteem 
for  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer ;  but  inasmuch  as 
objections  had  been  brought  against  it,  he  thought  it 
well  that  it  should  be  reviewed  and  compared  with 
the  most  ancient  liturgies,  and,  if  necessary,  that 
alterations  and  amendments  should  be  made  in  it. 


Savoy  Conference.  445 


The  conference  was  begun  at  the  Palace  of  the 
Savoy,  on  April  15 ;  and,  the  Archbishop  being  old 
and  infirm,  the  leadership  was  taken  by  Sheldon, 
Bishop  of  London.  The  Archbishop  of  York  called 
upon  Sheldon  to  make  known  the  order  of  proceed- 
ings, when  the  Bishop  declared  that  they,  as  church- 
men, had  no  desire  for  any  changes  in  the  Prayer 
Book ;  but  they  would  be  glad  to  hear  what  the 
other  party  wanted.  The  dissidents  who  expected 
to  engage  in  a  disputation  did  not  quite  approve  of 
this  method ;  but  Baxter  accepted  the  challenge  and 
after  about  a  fortnight  produced  his  "Reformed 
Liturgy,"  which  he  asked  that  the  minister  should 
be  permitted  to  use,  instead  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  when  he  wished  to  do  so.  The  services  in 
Baxter's  book  were  entirely  made  up  of  phrases  from 
the  Scriptures. 

Baxter  and  the  other  divines  on  his  side  could  not 
quite  agree  on  this  subject,  and  the  latter  brought 
up  on  their  own  account  a  "Petition  to  the  Bishops." 
Admitting  the  excellence  of  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  especially  considering  the  time  of  its  com- 
position, they  pointed  out  that  it  was  drawn  up 
partly  to  satisfy  the  Romanists,  and  said  that  it  should 
now  be  made  to  satisfy  the  Presbyterians.  Their 
objections  strike  at  the  whole  structure  of  the  book, 
and  tend  to  the  substitution  of  a  service  conducted 
entirely  by  the  minister,  and  in  which  the  congre- 
gation should  take  no  part.  Thus  they  objected  to 
the  number  of  short  prayers  and  to  the  responses ; 
also  to  Saints'  Days,  to  Lent,  to  the  exclusion  of 
extempore  prayer,  to  the  reading  of  the  Apocrypha, 


446  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

to  the  use  of  the  word  Priest,  and  various  other 
points.  They  wanted  a  longer  Catechism.  They 
wished  to  make  optional  the  surplice,  the  cross  in 
baptism,  and  kneeling  at  communion. 

To  this  the  bishops  replied  by  pointing  out  the 
excellence  of  the  Liturgy,  and  remarking  that  the 
sober  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  were 
attached  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  deserved  no 
less  consideration  than  those  who  objected  to  it ;  and 
these  desired  no  alteration.  The  Prayer  Book,  they 
said,  had  been  compiled  from  Holy  Scripture  and 
the  ancient  liturgies,  had  nothing  superfluous  or  un- 
necessary, and  had  been  greatly  appreciated  by  the 
foreign  reformers.  In  regard  to  the  shorter  prayers 
and  responses,  they  contended  that  they  were  better 
adapted  for  maintaining  a  devotional  spirit  than  long, 
unbroken  prayers ;  and,  if  the  congregation  might 
join  with  the  minister  in  psalmody,  wh}'^  not  in 
prayer?  Saints'  Days  were  of  primitive  use,  and 
were  sustained  by  the  example  of  Christ  in  keeping 
the  Feast  of  Dedication.  So  also  they  defended 
Lent,  the  exclusion  of  extempore  prayer,  and  the 
reading  of  the  Apocrypha. 

The  bishops,  however,  offered  to  make  certain  con- 
cessions which  gave  very  little  satisfaction  to  the 
dissidents;  and  it  was  agreed  that  the  two  parties 
should  meet  and  discuss  their  differences.  The  dis- 
cussion came  to  very  little,  since  the  bishops  took 
the  line  which  they  had  followed  from  the  beginning, 
protesting  their  willingness  to  hear  any  objections  to 
the  Prayer  Book,  and  to  alter  anything  which  might 
be  proved  to  be  wrong,  asking  the  dissidents  to  dis- 


Puritan  Objections  to  Prayer  Book.         447 


tinguish  between  what  they  regarded  as  sinful  in  the 
Prayer  Book,  and  what  they  opposed  as  merely  in- 
expedient. In  reply  they  brought  forward  eight 
particulars  as  sinful :  1.  Requiring  the  use  of  the 
cross  in.  baptism ;  2.  The  wearing  of  a  surplice  by 
the  officiating  minister ;  3.  Kneeling  at  the  reception 
of  the  communion  ;  4.  Requiring  ministers  to  pro- 
nounce all  children  regenerate  in  baptism,  whether 
they  were  the  children  of  believers  or  not ;  5.  Re- 
quiring ministers  to  deliver  the  sacrament  to  com- 
municants individually,  whether  fit  or  unfit ;  6.  To 
absolve  the  unfit ;  7.  To  give  thanks  for  all  whom 
they  bury ;  and  8.  To  require  that,  before  any  one 
is  permitted  to  preach,  he  must  subscribe  that  there 
is  nothing  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God  in  the  Com- 
mon Prayer  Book,  the  Book  of  Ordination,  and  the 
Thirty-nine  Articles. 

It  was  not  likely  that  such  considerations  would 
prevail  with  the  opponents  of  the  objectors ;  and  in 
point  of  fact,  it  is  said  that  some  who  were  well  dis- 
posed towards  the  Puritans  and  wished  to  make  all 
reasonable  concessions  to  them,  were  driven  to  a  de- 
termined opposition.  The  time  had  expired  before 
the  controversy  came  to  an  end ;  and  the  conference 
came  virtually  to  nothing.  The  commissioners  re- 
ported to  the  King,  **  that  the  Church's  welfare,  that 
unity  and  peace,  and  his  Majesty's  satisfaction,  were 
ends  on  which  they  were  all  agreed ;  but  as  to  the 
means  they  could  not  come  to  an  harmony." 

If  the  Nonconformists  fared  badly  at  the  Savoy 
Conference,  they  fared  still  worse  with  Parliament. 
This  was  the  second  Parliament  of  Charles  II.,  the 


448  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

former  being  called  the  Convention  Parliament  be- 
cause it  was  convoked  without  the  King's  writ. 
This  second  Parliament  assembled  May  8, 1661 ;  and 
if  the  former  one  was  loyal,  this,  not  improperly 
called  the  Cavalier  Parliament,  was  passionately  in 
favor  of  Church  and  King  and  opposed  to  the  Puri- 
tans. This  must  be  carefully  borne  in  remembrance 
when  we  form  our  judgment  of  some  of  the  meas- 
ures of  the  Restoration  which  may  seem  objection- 
able on  the  ground  of  justice  or  expediency.  The 
bishops  and  the  clergy  in  general  and  the  King  were 
disposed  to  be  more  considerate  to  the  Nonconform- 
ists than  the  Parliament  would  allow  them  to  be. 

There  is  something  to  be  said  for  the  feelings  of 
in  lignation  by  which  the  Cavalier  party  were  now 
swayed,  just  as  we  have  allowed  that  the  Puritans 
had  great  provocation  in  the  early  days  of  Charles 
and  Laud ;  and  we  must  try  to  understand  the  point 
of  view  of  the  Church  and  King  party.  They  had 
been  driven  from  their  churches  and  their  homes  for 
maintaining  their  faith  and  devotion  by  men  who 
had  stirred  up  rebellion  on  the  pretext  of  defending 
their  civil  and  religious  liberties.  King  Charles  had 
been  forced  into  war  with  his  people  because  he 
would  not  submit  to  the  decisions  of  Parliament; 
and  those  wiio  had  brought  this  charge  against  him, 
mutilated  Parliament  wlien  tliey  could  not  get  a  ma- 
jority to  do  their  bidding.  Finally,  with  or  without 
a  relic  of  Parliament,  the  religious  liberties  of  a  ma- 
jority of  the  English  people  had  been  rntlilessly 
trampled  upon,  their  clergy  driven  to  beggary,  and 
th3ir  gentry  deprived  of  their  estates. 


Feelings  of  Cavaliers,  449 

It  was  impossible  that  men,  with  injuries  like  these 
rankling  in  their  heart,  'lould  have  been  restored 
to  power  without  thought,  of  retaliation  ;  and  there 
were  few  members  of  the  new  Parliament  who  had 
not  suffered  in  some  way  at  the  hands  of  the  mob  or 
the  soldiery  during  the  rebellion.  They  voted  that 
neitlier  house  could  pretend  to  the  command  of  the 
militia,  nor  could  lawfully  make  war  upon  the  King. 
The  authors  of  seditious  pamphlets  were  declared 
traitors.  All  who  held  office  in  municipal  corpora- 
tions were  required  to  renounce  the  Covenant,  and 
to  take  an  oath  of  nonresistance,  declaring  it  to  be 
unlawful  to  take  up  arms  against  the  King,  and  were 
also  required  to  receive  the  Holy  Communion  accord- 
ing to  the  rite  of  the  Church  of  England.  The  bish- 
ops were  restored  to  their  place  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
and  a  declaration  was  made  that  the  act  abolishing 
the  High  Commission  Court  did  not  interfere  with 
the  authority  of  the  bishops  or  the  supremacy  of  tho 
King.  This  was  giving  fair  warning  to  the  represent- 
atives of  the  dissidents  as  to  what  they  might  expect. 

The  House  of  Commons,  anxious  to  prevent  con- 
cessiony  to  the  Puritans,  resolved,  June  25,  1661, 
"  that  a  committee  bo  appointed  to  view  the  several 
laws  for  confirming  the  Liturgy  of  the  Church  of 
England,  .  .  .  and  to  bring  in  n  compendious  bill  to 
supply  any  defect  in  the  former  laws,  and  to  provide 
for  an  effectual  conformity  to  the  Liturgy  of  the 
Church  for  the  time  to  come."  On  July  3d,  the 
Prayer  Book  of  James  L  was  brought  into  the 
House  and  referred  to  a  committee  which  (Jul}'^  8) 
recommended  certain  amendments.  On  the  day  fol- 
cc 


450  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

lowing  the  bill  for  uniformity  was  read  a  third  time; 
so  that,  whilst  the  Savoy  Conference  was  still  going 
on,  the  House  of  Commons  had  declared  that  there 
must  be  conformity  to  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
under  serious  penalties.  As  it  was  known  that  a  re- 
vision was  being  undertaken  the  House  of  Lords  laid 
the  bill  aside,  and  Parliament  was  prorogued  until 
the  30th  of  November. 

In  the  meantime  Convocation  had  met  on  the  8th 
of  May,  and  had  prepared  a  Thanksgiving  Service 
for  the  29th  of  Maj',  the  anniversary  of  the  King's 
birth  and  of  the  Restoration ;  and  also  an  ofBce  for 
the  baptism  of  adults.  On  October  10th  the  King's 
letters  were  issued  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 
ordering  him  to  cause  his  Convocation  to  institute  a 
review  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  and  to  make 
such  alterations  in  it  as  they  should  think  fit,  and 
bring  them  before  the  King  for  his  consideration. 
The  second  session  of  this  Parliament  began  on  No- 
vember 20,  and  on  the  following  day  the  Convoca- 
tion of  Canterbury  met  and  at  once  appointed  a 
committee  of  eight  bishops,  who  were  to  take  the 
work  of  revision  in  hand. 

This  work  had  been  well  advanced  beforehand. 
The  chief  agent  was  Cosin,  now  Bishop  of  Durham, 
who  had,  for  many  years,  kept  notes  of  all  the  sug- 
gestions made  for  the  improvement  of  the  Prayer 
Book ;  and  who,  having  acted  as  librarian  to  Bishop 
Andre wes  and  Bishop  Overall,  knew  the  opinion  of 
those  eminent  divines  on  these  subjects.  Cosin  had 
the  cooperation  of  Wren,  who  had  also  given  great 
attention  to  the  questions  raised;  and  his  secretary 


Work  of  Cosin,  451 


was  Sancroft,  afterwards  Archbibhop  of  Canterbury. 
Consequently  the  committee  were  soon  able  to  re- 
port, and  on  Saturday,  the  23d  of  November,  a  por- 
tion of  the  book  with  the  suggested  alterations  was 
delivered  to  the  Prolocutor,  and  the  remainder  on 
the  following  Wednesday.  The  alterations  adopted 
by  Convocation  were  entered  by  Sancroft  in  a  folio 
Prayer  Book  of  1636 ;  and  after  the  work  was  com- 
pleted, the  whole  was  transcri!  ed,  compared  with 
the  book,  and  subscribed  by  both  houses  of  Convoca- 
tion, and  by  proxies  from  the  Convocation  of  York, 
December  20,  1)61, 

The  Houses  r»f  Parliament  were  growing  impa- 
tient, the  book  being  detained  for  a  time  by  the  King 
and  Council.  At  last  a  copy  confirmed  under  the 
Great  Seal  was  delivered  with  a  royal  message  to 
Parliament,  February  25, 1662.  The  House  of  Lords 
then  agreed  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity,  but  with  the 
revised  book  annexed,  instead  of  the  earlier  one ;  and 
on  the  following  day  (March  18)  they  accepted  the 
amended  Prayer  Book,  giving  thanks  to  Convocation 
for  their  care  and  labor.  The  House  of  Commons 
accepted  the  new  book,  and  the  royal  assent  was 
given  May  19,  1662.  As  no  fewer  than  six  hundred 
alterations  were  made  in  this  book,  it  would  be  im- 
possible even  to  mention  them  here.  Inasmuch, 
however,  as  our  present  Prayer  Book  is  the  result  of 
the  work  then  accomplished,  and  the  last  explicit 
testimony  of  the  English  Reformation,  it  is  necessary 
to  note  the  principal  changes,*  and  to  consider  briefly 
their  doctrinal  and  liturgical  significance. 

'  These  will  be  found  at  greater  length  in  Procter's  "History  of 
the  Book  of  Commou  Prayer." 


452  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

The  preface  is  said  to  have  been  written  by  San- 
derson, Bishop  of  Lincoln,  the  original  preface  of 
1549  being  appended  as  a  chapter,  *^  Concerning  the 
Service  of  the  Church."  With  the  exception  of  the 
Psalter,  the  Ten  Commandments,  the  sentences  at 
the  beginning  of  Morning  and  Evening  Prayer,  and 
the  Comfortable  Words  in  the  Communion  Service, 
the  passages  of  Scripture  were  taken  from  the  "Au- 
thorized Version."  The  introductory  part  of  the 
service  was  now  prefixed  to  Evensong  as  well  as  Mat- 
ins. "Priest"  instead  of  "minister,"  was  placed 
before  the  absolution.  The  prayer  for  the  King  and 
the  collects  following  were  printed  in  the  order  of 
Morning  and  Evening  Service.  "Rebellion"  and 
"  schism  "  were  added  in  the  Litany  to  the  petition 
against  "sedition."  "  Bishops,  priests  and  deacons " 
were  substituted  for  "  bishops,  pastors,  and  ministers 
of  the  Church."  Among  the  Occasional  Prayers 
were  added  the  two  Ember  Collects,  the  Prayer  for 
Parliament,  the  Prayer  for  all  conditions  of  men,  the 
General  Thanksgiving,  and  a  Thanksgiving  for  the 
Restoration  of  public  peace  at  home.  Some  new 
collects  were  added  and  changes  made ;  for  example, 
"  Church  "  was  put,  in  several  places,  for  "  Congre- 
gation." In  the  Communion  Service,  in  the  Prayer 
fur  the  Church  Militant,  the  last  clause  relating  to 
the  blessed  dead  was  added.  Directions  were  given 
for  the  presentation  of  the  alms  and  the  placing  of 
the  bread  and  wine  upon  the  table  before  this  prayer. 
Before  the  Prayer  of  Consecration  a  rubric  was  intro- 
duced directing  the  priest  to  order  the  bread  and 
wine  in  a  certain  manner;  also  the  diiections  for 


Changes  in  the  Prayer  Book.  463 

consecrating  additional  bread  and  wine  and  for  cov- 
ering what  was  left  over  with  a  fair  linen  cloth. 
The  order  in  Council  (1662)  respecting  kneeling  at 
communion,  which  had  been  removed  at  the  Eliza- 
bethan revision,  was  now  restored  with  alterations 
which  will  be  presently  considered.  The  catechism 
was  separated  from  the  order  of  confirmation,  and  the 
first  rubric  explaining  the  meaning  of  confirmation 
was  appointed  to  be  read  as  the  preface  to  the  service, 
followed  by  the  renewal  of  the  baptismal  vow.  In 
the  marriage  service,  the  rubric  directing  that  "  the 
now  married  persons,  the  same  day  of  their  marriage, 
must  receive  the  Holy  Communion  "  was  altered  to 
a  declaration  that  it  is  convenient  so  to  do,  or  at  the 
first  opportunity  after  their  marriage.  Some  changes 
were  also  made  in  the  Visitation  of  the  Sick  and  the 
Communion  of  the  Sick.  In  the  order  for  burial, 
the  rubric  respecting  persons  unbaptized  or  excom« 
municated  was  added.  The  Commination  Service 
was  directed  to  be  used  on  the  first  day  in  Lent. 
Forms  of  prayer  were  supplied  to  be  used  at  sea ; 
also  for  January  30,  May  29,  and  November  6.  The 
last  of  these  was  subsequently  made  also  to  commem- 
orate the  landing  of  Prince  William  of  Orange ;  and 
all  the  three  were  removed  from  the  Prayer  Book  in 
1859. 

We  may  differ  in  an  estimate  cf  he  work  which 
was  accomplished  by  the  reviser  16C1 ;  but  there 
is  no  difficulty  in  understanding  its  significance.  It 
is  obvious  that  no  consideration  was  shown  for  the 
Puritans,  and  for  this  the  revisers  have  been  blamed. 
But  it  is  eariier  to  censure  them  than  to  prove  that 


454  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

anything  which  they  could  have  done  would  have 
satisfied  those  men.  They  could  not  agree  among 
themselves,  their  demands  were  exorbitant,  and  there 
was  no  sign,  from  beginning  to  end,  that  any  con- 
cession on  the  part  of  the  bishops  would  have  been 
met  by  concessions  on  the  other  side.  Mutual  con- 
cessions were  nearly  as  little  understood  in  those 
days  as  mutual  toleration ;  and  however  much  we 
may  regret  the  schism  which  was  then  made  final, 
we  have  no  reason  to  be  surprised  at  such  a  result ; 
and  therefore  it  becomes  us  to  believe  that,  as  the 
Most  High  permitted  the  rending  of  the  Hebrew 
Kingdom  and  its  division  into  the  Kingdoms  of  Ju- 
dah  and  Israel,  and  thus  worked  out  His  own  coun- 
sels; so  these  and  other  "our  unhappy  divisions" 
may  and  will  by  Him  be  overruled  for  the  good  of 
mankind  and  His  own  glory. 

As  regards  the  relations  of  parties  within  the 
Church,  it  cannot  truly  be  said  that  a  victory  was 
gained  by  either  side.  Generally  speaking,  it  is  clear 
that  the  Elizabethan  settlement  was  adopted;  and 
this  is  shown  not  only  by  the  retention  of  the  two 
sentences  in  the  administration  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion, but  in  the  retention  or  restoration  of  fea- 
tures from  both  the  Prayer  Books  of  Edward  VI. 
Undoubtedly  the  tendency  at  the  Restoration  was 
what  we  should  call  upwards ;  but  there  was  no  in- 
tention shown  to  make  it  difficult  for  any  one  who 
had  previously  used  the  Prayer  Book  to  continue  to 
do  so. 

When  the  Prayer  Book  was  introduced  into  the 
Scottish  Church,  the  rubric  relating  to  the  north 


The  Ornaments  Riihric.  455 

side  was  altered  to  read  "  at  the  north  side  or  end 
thereof;"  and  some  attempt  seems  to  have  been 
made  to  have  tliis  alteration  introduced  in  1661.  If 
this  is  so,  the  animus  of  the  proposed  alteration  was 
probably  the  desire  to  fix  the  position  of  the  altar  at 
the  east  end ;  and  the  resistance  to  the  change 
would  equally  arise  from  the  hope  of  having  the 
table  again  standing  in  the  body  of  the  Church.  It 
is  interesting  to  remark  that,  if  the  *'  High  Church  " 
suggestion  had  been  adopted,  the  "  Eastward  Posi- 
tion "  would  have  been  positively  prohibited  by  the 
rubric ;  whilst  the  "Low  Church  contention  for  north 
side  left  the  position  of  the  celebrant  uncertain,  and 
so  made  it  possible  to  argue  in  favor  of  his  standing 
bcforo  the  table,  as  at  least  an  allowable  position. 

The  Ornaments  rubric  which  was  introduced  from 
the  Act  of  Uniformity  of  Elizabeth  has  given  rise  to 
a  great  discrepancy  of  opinion  and  action ;  one  party 
holding  that  it  was  intended  to  restore  the  vestments 
worn  under  the  first  Prayer  Book,  and  the  other  that 
it  was  intended  to  order  the  surplice  for  ordinary 
parish  churches  and  the  cope  on  certain  occasions 
for  Cathedrals  and  Collegiate  churches.  The  ques- 
tion is  not  so  clear  as  some  have  assumed  ;  but  we 
may  at  least  indicate  the  lines  on  which  the  argu- 
ment must  proceed. 

On  the  one  hand,  there  can  be  no  question  that 
the  Elizabethan  rubric  restored  the  ornaments  of 
1549,  and  that  practically  the  chasuble  was  never 
worn  during  the  Queen's  reign.  It  is  also  certain 
tliat  whether  the  advertisements  received  the  sanction 
of  Elizabeth  or  not,  they  represent  the  ritual  used 


456  The  Anglican  Reformation. 

whilst  she  was  Queen.  It  is  argued  by  those  who 
believe  that  the  vestment,  as  distinguished  from  the 
cope,  is  legal,  that  its  disuse  from  the  Restoration 
no  more  proves  its  illegality  that  it  did  in  the  reign 
of  Elizabeth;  and  that,  now  as  then,  the  surplice 
represents  a  minimum  of  ritual,  whilst  a  higher 
ritual  is  lawful. 

It  is  impossible,  and  it  is  undesirable  to  present 
the  arguments  here  at  length ;  yet  it  may  be  pointed 
out  that  the  case  is  now  somewhat  different.  What- 
ever may  be  said  of  the  Advertisements  of  Elizabeth, 
the  same  orders  respecting  the  "  ornaments  of  the 
minister  "  are  given  in  the  Canons  of  James;  namely, 
that  the  surplice  should  be  worn  in  parish  churches, 
and  in  addition,  the  cope  should  be  worn  on  special 
occasions  in  Cathedral  and  Collegiate  churches.  It 
would,  therefore,  appear  that  the  rubric  of  1661, 
requiring  that  the  ornaments  of  the  first  year  of 
Edward  VI.  should  be  retained,  would  be  satisfied 
by  the  use  of  the  cope,  the  Canons  of  James  being 
assumed  as  explaining  the  rubric,  and  being  obliga- 
tory on  the  Clergy.  It  is  much  to  be  regretted  that 
the  advice  given  by  Dean  Goulburn,  preaching  be- 
fore the  Church  Congress  at  Wolverhampton,  was 
not  taken ;  namely,  that  both  parties  should  agree 
to  a  friendly  action  in  which  the  opposing  arguments 
might  be  heard,  and  a  decision  arrived  at.  The 
course  of  the  controversy  has  been,  humanly  speak- 
ing, most  unfortunate,  and,  in  view  of  the  fact  that 
several  of  the  decisions  of  the  Privy  Council  have 
been  reversed,  it  can  hardly  be  said  to  be  settled. 

The  history  of  the  so-called  Black  Rubric  at  the 


The  Black  Rubric.      '  457 

end  of  the  communion  office  may  be  noticed  as  a 
standing  witness  to  the  differences  which  emerged 
among  those  who  were  equally  resolute  in  throwing 
oiT  the  domination  of  the  papal  see,  and  even  in  de- 
siring a  doctrinal  reformation ;  and  at  the  same  time 
of  the  conciliatory  and  comprehensive  spirit  in  which 
the  Anglican  formularies  were  drawn  up.  The 
changes  have  already,  to  some  extent,  been  pointed 
out ;  but  a  few  remarks  on  the  final  shape  to  which 
the  rubric  was  reduced  may  form  a  fitting  close  to 
this  brief  history.  It  was  clearly  the  intention  of 
those  who  placed  the  rubric  in  the  second  Prayer 
Book  of  Edward  VI.  to  exclude  all  belief  in  the 
"  Real  Presence."  It  is  probable  that  this  phrase 
was,  in  their  minds,  representative  of  the  Roman 
doctrine  of  Trans ubstantiation.  Theologians  do  not 
need  to  be  told  that  the  caution  is  inapplicable  to 
the  Lutheran  doctrine,  by  whatever  name  it  may  be 
called.  Consequently  there  was  a  certain  ambiguity 
in  the  phraseology. 

The  rubric  or  note  in  the  second  Book  of  Edward 
VI.  was  evidently  directed  against  Transubstantia- 
tion.  But  long  before  this  time  there  had  come  into 
the  Church  the  custom  of  speaking  of  a  real  presence 
of  Christ  in  the  Sacrament,  a  form  of  speech  un- 
known to  the  early  Church ;  and  afterwards  there 
came  to  be  a  holding  of  a  real  presence  which  was 
not  regarded  as  identical  with  the  doctrine  of  Tran* 
substantiation.  For  this  reason,  doubtless,  it  was 
that  Elizabeth  would  not  permit  the  retention  of  the 
note  in  Edward's  book,  which  declared  that  it  was 
not  meant   by  the  kneeling  at   Holy  Communion 


458  The  Anglican  Reformation, 

♦*  that  any  adoration  is  done,  or  ought  to  be  done, 
either  unto  the  sacramental  bread  or  wine  there 
bodily  received,  or  unto  any  real  and  essential  prep- 
ence  there  being  of  Christ's  natural  flesh  and  blood." 
Tlio  spirit  which  dictated  tliese  lines  was  one  of  ex- 
clusiveness,  or  else  a  desire  to  court  the  growing 
Protestant  party.  Elizabeth,  on  the  contrary,  was 
hoping  to  build  up  a  church  from  which  none  sliould 
be  excluded,  and  she  regarded  the  extreme  Protes- 
tant party  with  dislike  and  suspicion. 

The  Church  had  passed  through  various  experi- 
ences before  the  time  of  the  last  revision.  Appar- 
ently Sheldon,  Cosin,  and  their  coadjutors  did  not 
think  it  quite  safe  to  omit  this  rubric  altogether. 
Suspicion  was  afloat  that  there  was  an  intention  of 
allowing  a  general  toleration,  in  order  to  include  the 
Roman  Catholics,  similar  to  the  attempt  afterwards 
made  by  James  II.;  and  the  bishops  well  knew  that 
tlie  Puritans  would  take  advantage  of  such  a  state 
of  the  public  mind,  in  order  to  create  or  strengthen 
prejudices  against  the  Church.  For  this  and  other 
reasons,  they  restored  the  rubric,  but  with  a  consid- 
erable modification  of  the  part,  quoted  above,  on  tlie 
adoration  of  the  Sacrament,  which  was  made  to  read 
as  follows :  ♦'  It  is  liereby  declared,  that  thereby  no 
adoration  is  intended,  or  ought  to  be  done,  either 
unto  the  sacramental  bread  and  wine,  there  bodily 
received,  or  to  any  Corporal  Presence  of  Christ'' 6  nat- 
tiral  Flesh  and  Blood.''  Tlie  time  had  gone  by  when 
it  could  be  hoped  that  believers  in  Transubstantia- 
tion  might  be  won  to  remain  within  the  Church  es- 
tablished; and  if  the  England  of  the  Restoration 


The  Old  Ways.  459 


had  come  to  detest  Puritanism,  it  had  come  no  nearer 
to  the  love  of  Komanism,  as  the  passing  of  the  tost 
acts  may  abundantly  demonstrate.  Here,  then,  the 
Church  of  England  takes  her  position,  doing  lier 
best  to  stand  upon  the  old  ways,  holding  to  the 
ancient  principles  of  the  Church,  but  refusing  to 
identify  mediosval  dogmas  with  primitive  beliefs,  and 
also  refusing,  under  the  pretext  of  loyalty  to  the 
Scriptures,  to  disregard  the  early  customs  and  tradi- 
tions of  tlie  Apostolic  Church. 

As  we  look  back  over  nearly  a  century  and  a  half 
which  has  elapsed  since  Henry  VIII.  began  his  con- 
flict with  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  the  eye  falls  upon 
many  a  scene  which  fills  the  heart  of  the  beholder 
with  gratitude  and  hope,  if  there  are  also  incidents 
that  awaken  sorrow,  shame,  and  apprehension.  Yet 
we  have  before  us  the  record  of  a  series  of  events, 
which,  taken  as  a  whole,  may  well  make  the  child  of 
the  Anglican  Communion  proud  of  his  spiritual  de- 
scent. If  the  figures  which  stand  out  before  us  are 
seldom  heroic,  it  would  be  difficult  to  find,  in  any 
similar  period  of  the  history  of  mankind,  and  within 
the  same  compass,  an  equal  number  of  men  so  highly 
distinguished  by  calm  intelligence,  extensive  learn- 
ing, a  deep  and  sincere  sense  of  duty  to  God  and 
man,  and  a  resolute  and  self-sacrificing  devotion  to 
the  work  to  which  they  believed  themselves  called 
by  the  Providence  and  Spirit  of  God. 


INDEX. 


Abbot,  A.rchbishop,  relations  to 
James,  383,  life  sketched,  383, 
381,   appoiatmeat   to  Canter- 
bury uafortuaate,  884,  perse- 
cution3,  384  sq.,  conscieatious- 
ness,  386,  "  Book  of  Sports," 
387,  waniag  influence,  388,  rc- 
monstraace  to  king,  389,  con- 
demns Montagu,  39  J,  influence 
of  Laud,  391  sq  ,  deatli   an  1 
character,   393,  refusal   to  li- 
cense Sibthorp's  sermon.  397, 
king   recalls    to    court,    897, 
wears  cope,  405. 

Absolution,  366. 

Act  of  Henry  IV.  against  here- 
tics revived,  237. 

Act  of  Succession,  84.  183. 

Act  of  Supremacy.  363,  291. 

Act  of  Uniformity.  First.  133 
sq.,  Second,  163.  163,  Eliza- 
bethan. 253,  859,  280,  337, 388, 
Charles  II.,  451. 

Admonition,  first  and  second. 
316. 

Advertisements,  the,  305  sq.. 
453,  456. 

Agatho,  Pope,  6. 

Alexander  HI.  advises  Becket  to 
yield  to  king,  23. 

Alexander  IV.  claims  first  fruits, 
28. 

Alexander  VI.,  character,  50,  51. 

Altar,  destruction,  157,  disap- 
pearance of  word  from  Prayer- 
Book,  171,  Injunctions,  263, 
position    of,    405,    455.     See 


Laud ;  Parliament,  Long ;  Com- 
munion, Holy ;  Council. 

Anabaptists,  persecuted,  83,  143, 
errors  condemned  in  Articles, 
297,  298,  variety,  827,  838. 

Andrewes,  Bishop  of  Winches- 
ter, 865,  Authorized  Version, 
377,  mentioned  for  Canter- 
bury, 883,  leadership,  888. 

Anglican  orders,  validity  of. 
See  Parker,  Matthew. 

Anglican,    Ileformation,  special 
characteristics,  1  sq.,  rejection 
of  papal  supremacy,  2,  impulse 
of  Renaissance,    57  sq.,  rela- 
tions of  sovereign  and  people, 
100,  leaders    not  eclectics  or 
mediators,  104,  principles,  153, 
influence  of  continental  Prot- 
estants, 155  sq.,  342  sq.,  con- 
sequence  under  Edward  VI., 
179,  Westminster  Abbey  con- 
ference, 255  sq. .  in  earnest.  263 
sq.     See  England.  Church  of  ; 
Henry    VIII.,    Edward    VI., 
Mary,    Elizabeth,    James   I., 
Charles   I..  Cranmer,  Parker, 
Jewel,  Abbot,  Laud.  Hooker, 
Richard  ;  Act  of  Uniformity, 
Articles,    Communion,  Holy  ; 
Bible,     Ordinal,     Parliament, 
Long  ;  Prayer-Book,  Restora- 
tion, and  other  titles  at  end  of 
England,  Churcli  of. 

Anne  of  Cleves,  111. 

Ansclm  of  Canterbury,  quarrel 
with  William  Rufus,  14,  with 


461 


462 


Index, 


Henry  I.,  14  sq.,  enforcement 
of  celibacy,  16. 

Antinomianism,  302. 

Apocrypha,  367. 

"  Apologia"  of  Jewel,  283,  284, 
285,  286. 

"  ApostoliciE  Curse,"  275. 

"  Appclo  Csesarem,"  396,  398. 

Arminians  and  Arminianism, 
292,  343.  390,  397.  398. 

Arthur,  brother  of  Henry  VIII. , 
71. 

Arthur,  summoned  for  heresy, 70. 

Article,  XVII.  not  Calvinistic, 
345. 

Articles,  Eleven,  300,  301. 

Articles,  Fifteen,  319. 

Articles,  Forty-two  (or  Forty- 
five),  177,  287,  292. 

Articles,  Lambeth,  343  sq.,  367, 
398. 

Articles,  Six,  108  sq.,  modified, 
113,  repealed,  127. 

Articles,  Ten,  103  sq. 

Articles,  Thirty-nine,  177,  287, 
293  sq.,  301  sq.,  made  law, 
313.  subscribed,  370. 

Articles,  Twenty-four,  331. 

Arundel,  Archbishop,  46,  on  pil- 
grimages, 53. 

Aske,  Robert,  95. 

Askew,  Anne,  118. 

Assembly,  Scotch  General,  410. 

Audley,  Sir  Thomas,  92. 

Augsburg,  Confession  of,  107, 
298. 

Augustine,  missionary  to  Eng- 
land, 3. 

Augustine,  St.,  343. 

Auricular  Confession,  109.  See 
Pennnce. 

Bacon,  Lady,  translator  of 
"Apologia,"  286. 

Bacon,  Sir  Nicholas,  lord  chan- 
cellor, 253,  president  of  West- 
minster Abbey  Conference, 
255,  256,  relations  to  Parker, 
266,  rebuked  by  Parker,  317. 


Bale,  Bishop,  consecration  of 
Parker,  267. 

Bancroft,  Archbishop,  on  Epis- 
copacy, 340,  Hampton  Court 
Conference,  365  sq.,  convoca- 
tion of  Canterbury,  370,  chosen 
archbishop,  371,  sketch  of  life, 
373,  severity,  372-373,  sermon 
at  Paul's  Cross  on  Episcopacy, 
372,  collision  with  common 
law  courts,  374,  375,  Author- 
ized Version,  376,  death  and 
character,  381,  383. 

Baptism,  defined  in  Ten  Articles, 
103,  ritual  changed  in  Second 
Book,  166,  167,  sign  of  cross, 
287,  regeneration,  288,  changes 
in  ritual,  301,  Hooker's  view, 
358,  lay,  287,  366. 

Baptists,  337,  toleration  for,  443. 

Barlow,  Bishop,  Parker's  conse- 
cration, 267,  269,  271,  272,  rec- 
ord of  consecration,  272,  273. 

Barlow,  Dean  of  Chester,  on 
Hampton  Court  Conference, 
3G6. 

Baro,  Peter,  assails  Lambeth 
Articles,  345. 

Barret,  denial  of  indefectibility 
of  faith,  343. 

Barrow  and  Barrowists,  327. 

Barton,  Elizabeth,  "  Nun  of 
Kent,"  83.  84. 

Baxter,  Richard,  opposes  re- 
quirement of  Solemn  League 
and  Covenant,  425,  influence 
of,  443,  "  Reformed  Liturgy," 
445. 

Bcale,  clerk  of  council,  381. 

Becket,  Thomas,  relations  to 
Henry  II.,  21  sq.,  effect  of 
murder,  23,  24,  cult,  97,  C8. 

Bedingfleld,  Sir  Henry,  245. 

Benedictines,  52. 

Benedictines  of  St.  Maur,  53, 

Benefit  of  clergy,  65,  66. 

Berengarius  opposes  Transub- 
stantiation,  43. 

Bertlia,  wife  of  Ethelbert,  3. 


Index. 


463 


Bertram,  treatise  on  Eucharist, 
143. 

Beza,  influence  on  Cartwright, 
316. 

Bible,  translations  of,  42,  83. 
Matthew's,  106,  288,  "  Great," 
106,  289,  375,  376,  set  up  in 
churches,  106,  107,  "Para- 
phrase" of  Erasmus,  126, 
burned  at  Oxford,  240,  Tyn- 
dale's,288,  Coverdale's,  83, 106, 

288,  Elizabethan  period,  288. 

289,  Genevan,  289,  375,  376, 
879,  German  New  Testament, 
289.  Bishop's,  290,  375,  376, 
paramount  as  to  doctrine,  361, 
Authorized  Version,  375  sq., 
Roman  Catliolic  versions,  376. 

Bill  of  Treasons,  207. 

Bilney  burned.  70. 

Bihoa,  Bishop  of  "Winchester, 
"  Perpetual  Government," 341, 
at  Hampton  Court  Conference, 
365. 

Bishop's  Bible,  290.  375,  376. 

Bishop's  Book,  106,  119. 

Black  Rubric.  174,  259,  456  sq. 

Bocher.  Anne,  118. 

Bocher,  Joan,  143,  144, 

BockiUf^,  Canon  of  Canterbury, 
83,  84, 

Bolcyu,  Anne,  72,  divorce  and 
execution.  102. 

Boleyn,  Mary,  72. 

Bond,  Dr,,  candidate  for  mas- 
tership of  Temple,  333. 

Bonner,  upholds  royal  suprema- 
cy, 82,  86,  raised  to  episcopate, 
110.  on  changes,  126,  orders 
from  Council,  141,  imprisoned, 
145,  succeeded  by  Ridley,  155, 
position  under  Mary,  186,  tu- 
mult at  St.  Paul's,  187,  perse- 
cutions, 206  sq.,  210,  212,  214, 
215,  papal  delegate  to  carry  our 
degradation  of  Cranmer,  225 
sq.,  coldness  of  Elizabeth, 
249,  treatment  under  Eliza- 
beth,  262,  death,   262,  Nag's 


Head,  269,  Act  of  Supremacy, 
291. 

"  Book  of  Discipline,"  329,  335, 
836. 

"  Book  of  Sports,"  387,  402, 410. 

Bosa  of  York,  7. 

Bossuet,  on  variations  of  Prot- 
estantism, 192, 

Bound,  on  Sabbath  observance, 
341. 

Bourne,  Chaplain  to  Bonner,  187, 
Parker's  consecration,  267. 

Brandon,  Charles,  182. 

Brandon,  Frances,  182, 

Breda,  Declaration  of,  434,  440, 
443, 

British  Church,  3  sq. 

Brookes,  Bishop  of  Gloucester, 
trial  of  Crann)er,  216,  217.  of 
Ridley  and  Latimer,  218  sq. 

Brown,  Robert.  325.  326. 

Brownistg,  325  sq..  Hooker  in 
opposition,  361,  at  Westmin- 
ster Assembly.  428. 

Bucer,  Martin,  142.  influence, 
148,  150,  relations  to  Hooper, 
156,  "  Censure,"  159,  body  ex- 
humed and  burned,  240. 

Buchanan,  George,  teacher  of 
James  I.,  365, 

Buckeridge,  Bishop,  defends 
Montagu,  396, 

Buckingham,  Duke  of,  supports 
Andrewes,  333,  influence  of 
Williams,  388,  expedition, 
389,  friend  of  Laud,  395,  rup- 
ture with  Williams,  396,  death 
and  character,  398. 

BuUinger,  156,  160,  on  vest- 
ments, 309. 

Burial  Service,  changes  in  Sec- 
ond Book,  168. 

Burleigh.  Lord,  131,  succession 
of  Edward  VI.,  184,  249,  rcla- 
tions  to  Parker,  277,  Articles, 
296,  on  ritual  irregularities, 
805,  rebuked  by  Parker,  317, 
intercedes  for  Brown.  326, 
opposition  to  Whitgift,    331, 


464 


Index. 


833,  on  Lambeth  Articles,  344, 
845. 

Burnet,  on  Cromwell,  111,  on 
Cranmer,  116,  on  Gardiner, 
116,  on  Catharine  Parr,  117,  on 
Gardiner's  sermon,  131,  133, 
on  ritual  practices,  time  of 
First  Book,  141,  on  Eucharistic 
controversy,  143,  on  Heath, 
153,  on  persecutions,  238,  on 
imprisonment  of  bishops  under 
Elizabeth,  257. 

Butts,  Dr.,  Henry  VIII. 's  physi- 
cian, 114,  116. 

Calais,  loss  of,  244. 

Calixtus  II.,  consecrates  Thurs- 
ton to  York,  17. 

Calvin,  Calvinism,  view  of  Real 
Presence,  142,  writes  against 
Prayer-Book,  239,  Articles  not 
Calvinistic,  293,  contrasted 
with  Craumer,  ii94,  influence 
of,  342  sq.,  disciple  of  Augus- 
tine. 343,  Article  XVII.,  345, 
Hooker's  position,  361,  James 
favors,  384,  James  against, 
888  sq.,  under  Charles  I.,  397 
sq.    See  Presbyterians. 

Cambridge,  University  of,  on 
divorce  of  Henry  and  Catha- 
rine, 76,  on  royal  supremacy, 
82,  controversy  concerning 
Transubstantiation,  143 ;  vis- 
itation under  Pole,  240  ;  Puri- 
tan stronghold,  810. 

Camden,  on  policy  of  Eliza- 
betlian  reformers,  251. 

Campeggio,  papal  legate,  74. 

Campion,  Jesuit  missionary,  347, 
348. 

Canons,  under  James  I.,  370,  371. 

Canterbury,  relations  to  York, 
17,  19,   archbishop,  papal  le- 

fate,  25,  Convocation  of  1604, 
70. 
Cardinals'  College,  69. 
Carew,  Sir  Peter,  rebellion,  199. 
Carlisle,  Statute  of,  32. 


Carr,  Robert,  388. 

Carthusians,  53. 

Cartwright,  Thomas,  816,  Sec- 
ond  Admonition,  816,  second 
reply  to  Whitgift  and  flight, 
817,  "Book  of  Discipline," 
829,  426,  refuses  to  take  oath, 
338. 

Catechism,  Cranmer's,  132,  con- 
demned by  Convocation  under 
Mary,  196,  under  Elizabeth, 
290,  Longer  and  Shorter,  424. 

Catesby,  Robert.  874. 

Catharine  of  Aragon,  61,  71  sq., 
divorce  quashed  by  Mary's 
Parliament,  194,  Cranmer 
forced  to  recant  errors  con- 
cerning divorce,  233. 

Catharine  of  Medici,  814. 

Cavalier's  Parliament,  448. 

Cecil,  Sir  William.  See  Bur- 
leigh. 

Celibacy.  11,  13,  16 ;  actions 
against  married  clergy,  103 
sq.,  punishment  reduced,  112, 
removed,  140,  Injunctions, 263, 
under  Elizabeth.  281. 

Ceremonies,  Cranmer  on,  C59, 
Hooker  on,  359,  861.  Seo 
Ritual. 

Cbaderton,  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference, 364. 

Chalcedon,  Council  of,  on  Ro- 
man see,  3. 

Chantries,  assignment  of  prop- 
erty to  king,  124,  127. 

Charles  I.,  reasons  for  popular 
antagonism  to,  374,  supports 
Andrewes,  883,  expedition  to 
Spain,  389,  influence  of  Laud, 
391  sq.,  coronation,  892,  inter- 
poses for  Montagu,  396,  abso- 
lutism, 896  sq.,  recalls  Abbot 
to  court,  397,  "  Instructions," 
899,  relations  to  Calvinists, 
898.  400,  Book  of  Sports,  402, 
410,  Scotch  Prayer-Book,  406 
sq.,  yields  to  Scotcli  rebellion, 
410,  di.)dolve8   Parliament  of 


Index. 


465 


1640,  411,  action  of  Convoca- 
tion, 411,  412,  Long  Parlia- 
ment, 414  sq,,  wealiuess  with- 
out Laud's  support,  4i8,  lacli 
of  people's  trust,  418  sq., 
Grand  Kemonstrauce,  419,  con- 
sents to  degradation  of  bish- 
ops, 420,  421,  action  against 
Pym,  Hampden,  etc.,  421  sq., 
leaves  Whitehall,  422,  con- 
demns use  of  Directory,  427, 
428,  refuses  to  establish  Pres- 
byterianism,  433,  execution, 
433,  434.  See  Eugland,  Church 
of  ;  Laud. 

Charles  II.,  Declaration  of  Breda, 
439,  440,  accession,  441,  con- 
ference with  Puritans,  443, 
444,  Savoy  conference,  444, 
sq.,  second  Parliament,  447 
sq. 

Charles  V.,  Emperor,  74,  108, 
policy  toward  England,  197, 
198. 

Charles  IX.,  St.  Bartholomew, 
314. 

Charte-i-  of  Heury  I.,  22,  27. 

Charter  House,  386. 

Cheke,  Sir  John,  296. 

Chester,  Bishop  of,  on  "  Prophe- 
sy ings,"  323. 

Chichele,  Archbishop,  letter  of 
Martin  V.  to,  47. 

Christ  Church,  priory  of,  dis- 
solved, 92. 

Church  property,  90  sq.,  224, 
261,  317,  319,  332,  Hooker's 
views  on  sequestration  of,  360. 

Cistercians,  52. 

Clarendon,  Constitutions  of,  22, 
23,  27,  non-enforcement,  24. 

Clarendon.    See  Hyde,  Edward. 

Clama,  829. 

Clement  VI.,  provision  of,  3.3. 

Clement  XII.,  on  "  Ecclesiastical 
Policy,"  354. 

"Clerici8laicos,"82. 

Clugny,  52. 

Cluniacs,  52* 


Coke,  Sir  Edward,  374,  385,  886, 

387. 
Cole,  Dr.,  Westminster  Abbey 

Conference,    256,    sermon    at 

Cranmer's  death,  235. 
Colet,  John,  57,  58,  on  state  of 

clergy,  65. 
Colleges,  assignment  of  property 

to  king,  124,  127. 
Colman,  on  Easter  controversy, 

Common  Prayer  -  Book.  See 
Prayer-Book. 

Commonwealth,  435  sq. 

Communion,  Holy,  in  both  kinds, 
109,  127,  301,  office  of  Cran- 
mer,  128,  129,  opposition  and 
acts  to  enforce,  129,  office  in 
First  Book,  136  sq.,  substitu- 
tion of  tables  for  altars,  158, 
171,  Cranmer's  views,  143, 
161,  162,  changes  in  Second 
Book,  168  sq.,  discussions  at 
Oxford  under  Mary,  200,  202, 
homilies  on,  288,  articles  on, 
302,  803,  Hookei-'s  views,  858, 
Black  Kubric,  :'.74,  259,  456 
sq.  Bee  Transubstautiation, 
Real  Presence. 

Confession.  See  Auricular  Con- 
fession, Penance. 

Confession  of  Faith,  Presbyte- 
rian, 424,  429. 

Confirmation,  360. 

Conge  d  elire,  abolished,  127, 
present  practice,  127,  254. 

Congregationalists,  325. 

Constance.  Council  of,  exhuma- 
tion of  Wyclif's  remains,  44. 

Constantinople,  Council  of,  on 
Roman  see,  3. 

Constitutions  of  Clarendon,  22, 
23,  27,  non-enforcement,  24. 

Consubstantiation,  142. 

"  Consultation"  of  Hermann, 
129,  136. 

Convention  Parliament.  See 
Parliament. 

Convocation  of  1536,  102,  irreg- 


466 


Index. 


ular,  of  York,  105,  under  Eliz- 
abeth, 253,  255.  of  1563,  286, 
287,  300,  301,  of  1571,  300,  301, 
of  York  of  1604,  371.  For 
others,  see  England,  Church  of. 

Cook,  Hugh,  Abbot  of  Reading, 
96. 

Cooper,  Bishop,  on  Marprelate 
controversy,  336,  338. 

Cosin,  Bishop,  415,  Prayer- 
Book  revision,  450. 

Council,  Privy,  Edward  VI.'s 
minority,  123  sq.,  128  sq.,  144, 
orders  removal  of  altars,  158, 
orders  Articles,  295  sq.,  under 
Elizabeth,  330  sq.  See  Eng- 
land, Church  of. 

Councils,  General,  255,  288,  298. 

Court  of  High  Commission,  262, 
264. 

CourJenay,  Bishop  of  London, 
quarrel  with  Gaunt,  40,  trial 
of  Wyclif,  44. 

Qourtenay,  Earl  of,  194,  199, 
Pliilip's  intercession,  203. 

Covenant.  See  Solemn  League 
and  Covenant. 

Coverdale,  Miles,  translation  of 
Bible,  83,  106,  189,  288,  289, 
Parker's  consecration,  267,  269. 

Cox,  Richard,  first  Prayer-Book, 
133,  committee  to  revise  Pray- 
er Book,  252,  consecration,  276, 
preface  to  homilies,  287,  work 
on  Bible,  290,  revision  of  Arti- 
cles, 301  sq.,  on  Puritans,  318, 
S19,  letter  to  Burleigh  on 
*' Prophesy ings,"  322,  Bish- 
op's Bible,  376. 

Craumer,  Thomas,  characteris- 
tics, 75,  divorce  of  Henry  and 
Catharine,  75,  76,  divorce  of 
Anne  Boleyn,  102,  Matthew's 
Bible,  106,  Lutheran  views, 
108,  Six  Articles,  109,  obliged 
to  send  away  his  wife,  110,  on 
Cromwell,  110,  attacked,  113 
sq.,  prepares  English  version 
of  Litany,  119,  guidance  of  Ed- 


ward, 120,  123,  seconds  Som- 
erset's changes,  124,  conserva- 
tive position,  124, 125,  relations 
to  Gardiner,  126,  petition  of 
clergy  for  legislative  privi- 
leges, 127,  128,  new  commun- 
ion office,  128.  129.  opposition 
and  acts  to  enforce.  129,  cate- 
chism, 132,  flrat  Prayer- Book, 
133,  brings  Bucer  to  Cam- 
bridge, 142,  150,  views  on 
Eucharist,  143,  161,  162,  Joan 
of  Kent,  144,  defeats  rebellion 
against  Council,  144,  relations 
to  Hooper,  156,  reform  of 
Mass,  157,  second  Prayer- 
Book,  158  sq.,  162,  fairness, 
162,  opposes  Black  Rubric, 
174,  Articles,  177,  succession 
to  Edward  VI.,  187,  difficul- 
ties under  Mary,  190,  191,  sent 
to  Tower,  192,  found  guilty 
of  treason,  196,  197,  Eucha- 
ristic  discussion  at  Oxford, 
200-202.  punishment  suggest- 
ed by  Mary,  212,  petition  to 
queen  in  behalf  of,  213,  rea- 
sons for  postponement  of  pun- 
ishment, 215,  cited  to  appear 
before  pope,  216,  defence  in 
University  Church,  216-218, 
at  time  of  Ridley's  and  Lati- 
mer's execution,  220,  influence 
of  Ridley,  222,  excommunicat- 
ed, 225,  degradation,  225  sq., 
appeal,  227  sq.,  hope  of  es- 
cape, 229  sq.,  personal  worth 
and  defects,  230,  231,  submis- 
sion to  papal  party,  231  sq.,  re- 
moved to  deanery  of  Christ 
Church,  232,  no  reason  against 
believing  in  his  final  courage, 
234,  recants  recantation  and 
death,  235  gq.,  final  summing 
up,  237,  238,  liturgical  work, 
238,  leader  in  reform,  249  sq., 
on  ceremonies,  359. 
Crome  dissents  from  Six  Arti- 
cles, 1U9. 


hidex. 


467 


Cromwell,  Oliver,  first  recorded 
utterauce,  398,  un  Indepeudent, 
428,  429,  "Triers,"  4 JO,  437, 
absolutism,  437,  death,  438, 
work,  440. 

Cromwell,  Thomas,  75.  policy, 
81,  88,  91,  murder,  110,  char 
acteristics.  111,  112. 

Davenant,  Bishop  of  Salisbury, 
400. 

Davis,  Bishop,  of  St.  Asaph,  278. 

Day,  Bishop,  imprisoned,  158, 
sermon  at  Edward's  funeral, 
187. 

"  Defence  of  Proceedings 
against  Heretics,"  214. 

"  Defence  of  the  True  and  Cath- 
olic Doctrine  of  the  Sacra- 
ment," 161. 

De  Grey,  Bishop  of  Norwich,  25. 

"  De  htretico  comburendo,"  46. 

Delia  Mirandola,  Pico,  57. 

Denmark,  prince  proposes  mar- 
riage to  Elizabeth,  246. 

De  Noailles  on  effect  of  persecu- 
tions, 209,  picture  of  Mary's 
last  days,  244. 

Dcring,  Sir  Edward,  attacks 
Laud,  415,  Root  and  Branch 
bill,  417. 

De  Testa,  William,  33. 

Devon,  Earl  of.    See  Courtenay. 

Devonshire,  Earl  of,  393. 

"  Directory  of  Public  Worship," 

;    332,  under  Long  Parliament, 

'  426,  427,  condemned  by 
Charles,  427,  428. 

"  Discipline.' '  See  Book  of  Dis- 
cipline. 

Dissenters,  309,  311  sq.,  Eliza- 
beth's attitude  toward,  314  sq. 
See  under  separate  names. 

Dominicans,  30,  31,  52. 

Dominion,  theory  of,  39-41. 

Dort,  Synod  of,  387,  389. 

Douai  Old  Testament,  376. 

Dudley,  Earl  of  Warwick.  See 
Northumberland. 


Dudley,  Lord  Guildford,  182, 
found  guilty  of  treason,  196, 
death,  199. 

Dunbar,  Earl  of,  383. 

Duustan  applies  to  Rome  for 
pall,  9,  reasons,  10. 

Eadmer,  on  compromise  between 
Henry  and  Auselm,  15. 

Easter  controversy,  4. 

Easterfleld,  Council  of,  8. 

Eastward  position.  455. 

"  Ecclesiastical  Policy."  See 
Hooker. 

Edward  I.,  accession,  30,  Statute 
of  Mortmain,  31,  "  clericis 
laicos,  !32,  Statute  of  Carlisle, 
32. 

Edward  H.,  weakness,  33. 

Edward  III.,  complaints  to  papal 
see,  33,  feudal  tribute,  3b,  de- 
mands subsidies  for  war,  39, 
suspends  Statute  of  Provisors, 
39. 

Edward  VL,  guidance  of.  120, 
reign,  122  sq.,  Joan  of  Kent, 
144,  urges  revision  of  Prayer- 
Book,  160,  death,  102, 176,  184, 
Articles,  177,  295  sq.,  chari- 
table work,  180, 181,  piety  and 
ability,  181.  relations  to  Mary, 
182,  to  Lady  Jane  Grey  and 
Elizabeth,  182,  183,  influence 
of  Ridley,  222.     See  Council. 

Edward  the  Confessor,  11. 

Edwin,  King,  4. 

Egfrid  imprisons  Wilfrid,  6. 

Elizabeth,  born,  78,  declared  ille- 
gitimate, 102,  set  aside  by  Ed- 
ward VL,  183,  result  of  quash- 
ing divorce  of  Henry  and 
Catharine,  194,  harsh  treat- 
ment from  Mary,  194,  suspect- 
ed of  rebellion,  199,  in  Tower, 
199,  intercession  of  Philip,  203. 
204,  during  Mary's  reign,  245 
sq.,  marriage  proposals,  246, 
253,  254.  accession,  248,  early 
policy,  249,  religious  attitude, 


468 


Index, 


250  sq.,  first  Parliament,  252 
sq.,  C()nvocatiou*iu  opposition, 
255,  Injunclions,2Gi5-264,  royal 
supremacy,  263,  rtlations  to 
Parker.  265  sq.,  279.  299,  on 
non-juring  bisliops,  277,  278, 
relations  to  i^apacy,  278,  271), 
to  extreme  reformers,  279  sq., 
marriage  of  clergy,  281,  ap- 
proval of  Jewel's  work,  286, 
orders  Bible  set  up  in  cliurches, 
289,  ritual  irregularities,  306 
sq.,  Thirty-nine  Articles,  313, 
opposed  to  ecclesiastical  bills, 

813,  314,  on  St.  Bartholomew, 

814,  rebuked  by  Parker,  317, 
church  properties,  317,  319, 
832,  influence  of  Leicester, 
819,  Fifteen  Articles,  319, 
"  Prophesy in§s,"  320  sq., 
effect  of  policy  on  Church, 
833  sq.,  on  Lambeth  Articles, 
844,  relations  to  lioman  Catho- 
lics, 346  sq.,  excommunicated, 
846,  347,  personal  danger,  348, 
death  and  debt  to,  849. 

"  Engagement,"  435,  436. 

England,  Church  of,  early  his- 
tory, 2  sq.,  Peter's  pence,  8, 
influence  of  Theodore  of  Tar- 
sus, 5  sq.,  of  Dunstan,  9, 10,  of 
Edward  the  Confessor,  11, 
under  William  the  C'onqueror, 
12  sq.,  William  Rufus,  14, 
Henry  I.,  14  sq.,  Synod  at 
Westminster,  18,  relations  to 
Canterbury  and  York,  17-19, 
25,  under  Stephen,  20,  Henry 
n.,  21  sq.,  efiect  of  murder  of 
Bucket,  24,  case  of  Langton, 
25  sq.,  Magna  Charta,  27,  in- 
fluence of  Simon  de  Montfort, 
27,  under  Henry  III.,  27  sq., 
papal  provisions,  28,  29,  under 
Edward  I.,  30  sq.,  Statute  of 
Mortmain,  81,  "clericis  lai- 
cos,"  33,  Statute  of  Carlisle, 
82,  under  Edward  II.,  33.  Ed- 
ward III.,  33,  Wyclif,  87  sq., 


41  sq.,  Urban  V.  demands 
feudal  tribute,  38,"  Good  Par- 
liament," 39,  "  De  hcretico 
comburendo,"  46,  fifteenth 
century,  49  sq.,  impulse  of 
Renaissance,  67  sq.,  under 
Henry  VIII.,  61  sq.,  71  sq.,  79 
sq.,  "  Erastianism."  62,  royal 
supremacy,  67,  81,  82,  move- 
ments against  Rome  at  first 
political  and  social,  67,  sym- 
pathy with  Luther,  67,  policy 
of  Cromwell,  81,  88,  suppres- 
sion of  religious  houses,  DO  sq., 
insurrections,  95,  pilgrimage 
of  grace,  95,  Ten  Articles,  103 
sq.,  irregular  convocation  of 
York,  105,  Six  Articles,  108 
sq.,  113,  repealed,  127,  "King's 
Book,"  119,  English  version 
of  Litany,  119,  reign  of  Ed- 
ward VI.,  123  sq.,  royal  su- 
premacy under  Edward  VI., 
124,  visitations  under  Somer- 
set, 135,  136,  reformers  be- 
tween two  fires,  130,  persecu- 
tion of  Anabaptists,  143,  con- 
tinental Protestant  influence, 
155  sq.,  destruction  of  altars, 
157,  158,  consequences  of  Ref- 
ormation under  Edward  VI., 
179,  reign  of  Mary,  181,  182, 
185  sq.,  198,  religious  discus- 
sions prohibited,  188,  result, 
188  sq.,  foreign  reformers  ex- 
pelled, 193,  negotiations  with 
Rome,  197,  new  epoch  marked 
by  marriage  of  Philip  and 
Mary,  203  sq.,  reconciliation 
with  Rome,  204,  203.  prop- 
erty formerly  alienated  re- 
mains undisturbed,  205.  206, 
persecutions.  206  sq.,  212  sq., 
241,  act  of  Henry  IV.  against 
heretics  revived,  207,  Bill  of 
Treasons,  207,  effect,  209, 
215,  number  burned,  213,  new 
Parliament,  223,  property  re- 
stored to  Church,  224,  Frank* 


1- .". 


Index. 


469 


fort  colony,  239,  visitation  of 
tiniversities,  240,  241,  failures 
of  jNIiiry,  243,  244,  accession 
of  Elizabeth,  248  sq.,  first  Par- 
Haraeut,  252  sq.,  royal  suprem- 
acy under  Elizubetli,  254,  301, 
802,  convocation  in  opposition, 
255,  Westminster  Abbey  Con- 
ference, 255  sq.,  reversion  of 
cliurch  property,  201,  reforma- 
tion in  earnest,  262  sq.,  In- 
junctions, 202-264,  act  of  Par- 
liameni  legalizing  consecration 
of  new  bisliops,  273,  274,  Ad- 
vertisements, 305  sq.,  ecclesi- 
astical bills  defeated,  314, 
"  Prophesy ings,"  32;)  sq., 
Brownists,  325-327,  Presbyte- 
rians and  Independents.  327, 
Puritans  in  church,  3i8  sq., 
333  sq..  339  sq.,  ]Marprelatc 
controversy,  336,  effect  of  Cal- 
vinism. 342  .'*q.,  Lauibe  h  Arti- 
cles, 343  sq..  Parliament  of 
1571  ts.  Home,  347,  recusancy 
laws,  347  sq.,  under  James  I., 
363  sq.,  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference, 304  sq.,  convocation 
of  Canterbury,  370,  cinons, 
870,  371,  under  Charles  I.  and 
Laud,  891  sq.,  Scotch  outburst 
against  Episcopacy,  409,  410, 
Long  Parliament,  414  sq., 
canons  of  convocation  at- 
tacked, 415,  committee  to  re- 
vise ritual  and  doctrine,  416 
sq.,  Root  and  Branch  bill,  417, 
418,  433,  Grand  Kemon- 
strance,  419,  escape  of  bish- 
ops, 420,  their  degradation, 
4'>.0,  421,  Scotch  intervention, 
4^3,  Westminster  Assembly, 
424  sq.,  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant  imposed,  424  sq., 
tvranny  of  Puritans,  420  sq., 
Directory,"  426  sq.,  anarchy 
after  death  of  Charles,  435 
sq.,  "Engagement,"  435  sq  , 
"TrIei-3,"   433,  437,  Declara- 


tion of  Breda,  439,  440,  Res- 
toration, 411  sq.,  conference 
with  Puritans.  443,  444,  Savoy 
Conference,  444  sq..  second 
Parliament  of  Charles,  447 
sq.,  the  old  ways,  459.  See 
Act  of  Uniformity,  Commun- 
ion, Holy  ;  Articles,  Constitu- 
tions of  Clarendon,  Parliament, 
Prayer-Book,  Ordinal,  Convo- 
cation, Provisors,  Proemunire, 
Bible,  Real  Presence,  Ilomiiies, 
Episcopacy,  Puri'ans,  Ritual, 
Cranmer,  Cartwright,  Bon- 
ner. Gardiner,  Grindal,  Lati- 
mer, Ridley,  Hooker,  Whit- 
gift,  Laud,  Parker,  Pole,  Jew- 
el, Grey,  Lady  Jane  ;  Wyclif, 
Wilfricf,  Papacy,  and  indi- 
vidual nanus  of  monarchs. 

Episcopacy,  Bancroft  and  Bilson 
on,  310,  341.  arguments  of 
Elizabethan  reformers.  356, 
357,  controversies  under 
Charles  I.,  417.  418,  under 
commonwealth,  435  sq.,  Res- 
toration, 442. 

Erasmus,  sketch  of  life,  58, 
"  Encheiridion,"  58,  59, 
"  Praise  of  Folly,"  58,  differ- 
ences with  Luther,  59,  "  Para- 
phrase," 126. 

Erastianism,  128. 

Essex,  Countess  of,  divorced, 
886. 

Ethelbeit,  3. 

Fagius,    body    exhumed     and 

burned.  240. 
Fairfax  joins  Monk,  439. 
Falkland    against    Presbyterian 

despotism,  419. 
"  Family  of  Love,"  827,  828. 
Fawkes,  Guy,  375. 
Felton,  John,  898. 
Ferrar,  Bishop  of  St.   David's, 

burned,  212. 
Ficino.  57. 
Field,  admonition  to  Parliament, 


470 


Index, 


810,  at  Hampton  Court  Con- 
ference, 365. 

i'isher,  Bishop,  confessor  of 
Catharine,  78,  74,  defends 
purt^atory,  70,  belief  in  "  Nun 
of  Kent,"  83,  84,  refuses  oath 
to  succession  of  children  of 
Anne  Boleyn,  84,  animosity  of 
Henry,  84,  85,  cardinal,  85, 
death,  85. 

Fisher,  the  Jesuit,  controversy 
with  Laud,  893. 

"  Fortunes  of  Nigel,"  picture  of 
James  I.,  865. 

Fox,  on  divorce  of  Henry  and 
Catharine,  74,  presents  Ten 
Articles,  103. 

France,  peace  recommended  un- 
der Elizabeth,  252. 

Franciscans,  80,  81. 

Frankfort,  English  colony  at, 
289. 

French  type,  Reformation,  239. 

Friends,  828. 

Froude,  on  Henry  VHI.,  61. 

Fryth,  John,  suspected  of  Lu- 
theranism,  79,  imprisoned,  79, 
burned,  80. 

Fuller,  on  abusesof  Reformation, 

180.  on  Hooker,  852,  854,  on 
position  of  altar,  405. 

Gardiner,  on  divorce  of  Catha- 
rine and  Henry,  74,  upholds 
royal  supremacy,  82,  86,  87, 
attacks  Catharine  Parr,  116  ; 
fall  from  favor,  117-119,  de- 
fends customs  in  use,  125, 126, 
imprisoned,  126,  at  liberty, 
150,  allied  with  reactionaries, 
130,  sermon  before  king,  180, 

181,  imprisoned  again,  181, 
view  of  ordinal,  154,  succeed- 
ed by  Parker,  155,  answer  to 
Cranmer's  treatise  on  Eucha- 
rist, 163,  satisfaction  with  first 
Pra3'er-Book,  176,  position 
under  Mary,  186,  lord  chancel- 
lor, 188,  advoaates  mild  meas' 


ures  with  Cranraer,  191,  op- 
poses proposed  legateship  of 
JPole,  197,  anti  papal  but  not 
Protestant,  198,  marries  Philip 
and  Mary,  202,  hatred  of 
Elizabeth,  203,  connection 
with  persecutions,  206  eq., 
irritated  by  republication  of 
his  book  on  True  Obedience, 
208,  sick  of  persecutions,  210, 
lays  blame  on  queen,  212,  death 
and  characteristics,  223,  record 
of  consecration,  278. 

General  Assembly,  Scotch,  410. 

Geneva.     See  Reformation. 

Genevan  Bible.     See  Bible. 

Germany,  Reformation  in,  66, 
57.  802,  828,  Henry  VIH.'s  re- 
lations  to,  107  sq. 

Glastonbury,  dissolution  of  ab- 
bey, 98. 

Good,  Dr.,  charges  Baro  with 
heresy,  845. 

"  Good  Parliament,"  89. 

Good  works,  802. 

Goodrich,  Bishop,  first  Prayer- 
Book,  188. 

Gosnald,  Judge,  183. 

Goulburn.  Dean,  on  ritual  differ- 
ences, 456. 

Grand  Remonstrance,  419. 

Great  Bible.     Sec  Bible. 

Greek  Church,  view  of  Eucha- 
rist, 142. 

Gregory  VH.,  relations  to  Will- 
lam  the  Conqueror,  12,  18. 

Gregory  XIH.,  "  Te  Deum"  for 
St.  Bartholomew,  814. 

Gregory  the  Great,  English  mis- 
sion, 3. 

Grey,  Lady  Jane,  182-184,  found 
guilty  of  treason,  196,  death, 
199. 

Grindal,  commissioner  to  revise 
Prayer-Book,  252,  consecra- 
tion, 276,  Articles,  296,  criti- 
cism of  Elizabeth,  815,  re- 
mains in  church,  815,  succeeds 
to  Canterbury,  818,  character, 


Index. 


471 


818,  324,  Fifteen  Articles,  819, 
"  Prophesyiups,"  321,  sus- 
pended, 331,  323,  restored,  333, 
dealli,  323,  824. 

Grocyn,  58. 

Grosscteste,  Robert,  on  pnpal 
provisious,  29,  letter  io  Inno- 
cent, 29. 

Guest,  Prayer-Book  revision, 
257,  consecrated  to  Rochester, 
276,  work  on  Scriptures,  290, 
Articles,  301  sq..  Bishop's 
Bible,  378. 

Gunpowder  Plot,  374. 

Gunning,  Puritp.n  action  against, 
438. 

ITackett,  on  Barlow,  883. 

Hadrian,  Pope,  on  Peter's  Pence, 
8. 

Hales,  Judge,  183,  189. 

Hall,  Joseph,  388,  on  Long  Par- 
liament Commission,  417,  de- 
fence of  Episcopacy,  417,  in 
custody,  420,  persecution,  430. 

Hullam,  on  treatment  of  Roman 
Catholics,  319,  on  Hooker,  354, 
on  legality  of  expelled  bishops' 
protest,  430. 

Hamilton,  consecration  to  Gal- 
loway, 380. 

Hampden,  charged  with  treason, 
431. 

Hampton  Court  Conference,  864 
sq. 

Harding,  on  Parker,  268. 

Havdwick,  on  Articles,  294,  299. 

Harold,  King,  11. 

Haw  ley,  Bisliop  of  Hereford,  193. 

Havnes,  Dr.,  first  Prayer-Book, 
133. 

Heath,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  153, 
154. 

Heath,  Archbishop  of  York,  an- 
nounces accession  of  Elizabeth, 
248,  treatment  by  Elizabeth, 
263,  remonstrance  to  Parker, 
278. 

Henrietta  Maria,  891,  431. 


Henry  I.,  kingly  rights,  15,  Eng- 
lish liberties  diminished,  19, 
relation  to  popes,  15  sq.,  char- 
ter of,  22,  27. 

Henry  II.,  21  sq. 

lieury  HI.,  parliamentary  re- 
form, 27  sq. 

Henry  IV.,  destruction  of  Lol- 
lardism,  46,  act  of,  against 
heretics  revived,  207. 

Henry  VIII..  character,  01,  63, 
divorce  of  Catharine,  63,  71  sq., 
attractive  qualities,  63,  64, 
rights  of  crown,  67,  76,  81,  83, 
101,  reply  to  Lutncr,  68,  double 
course,  79.  Succession  and 
Treason  Acts,  84,  animosity  to 
Fisher  and  More,  84,  85,  ex- 
communicated, 86,  98,  judicial 
murder  of  Countess  of  Salis- 
bury, 86,  112,  relations  to 
Pole,  86,  87,  his  supremacy  an 
autocracy,  87-89,  suppression 
of  religious  houses,  90  sq.,  not 
the  first  in  this  field,  92,  insur- 
rections, 95,  pilgrimage  of 
grace,  9>,  not  friend  of  German 
Reformation,  101,  reactionary, 
101,  108,  marries  Jane  Sey- 
mour, 103,  sanctions  "  Institu- 
tion" and  Matthew's  Bible,  106, 
relations  to  foreign  reformers, 
107  sq.,  against  Lambert,  108, 
Six  Articles,  103  sq.,  murder 
of  Cromwell,  110  ;  relations  to 
Cranmer,  113  sq.,  to  Cuthaiine 
Parr,  116  sq.,  "  King's  Book," 
119,  English  version  of  Litany, 
119,  will,  119,  120,  arrest  of 
Norfolk  and  Surrey,  120, 
death,  120,  summary  of  Bur- 
net, 120,  anti-papal,  but  Ro- 
man, 121,  arranges  succession, 
123. 

Henry,  Prince  of  Wales,  384. 

Hereford,  Nicholas,  translation 
of  Old  Testament,  43. 

Hermann,  "  Consultation,"  129, 
136. 


472 


hidex. 


Hertford,  Council  at  (673),  5. 

Hertford,  Lord.    See  Somerset. 

Heylin,  oa  Marprelate  contro- 
versy, 337,  on  state  of  church 
under  Charles  1.,  399. 

High  Commission,  Court  of, 
abolished,  419,  Cavalier  Parlia- 
ment, 449. 

Hildebraud,  relations  to  William 
the  Conqueror,  12,  13. 

Hodgkins,  Bishop.  Parker's  con- 
secration, 267,  269. 

Holbeach,  Bishop,  first  Prayer- 
Book,  133. 

Holy  Communion.  See  Com- 
munion. 

Holyman,  Bishop,  trial  of  Lati- 
mer and  Ridley,  218  sq. 

Homage,  13,  15,  16. 

Homilies,  126,  second  book,  287, 
288. 

Honorius  III.,  reverses  action  of 
Innocent,  27. 

Hoods,  263. 

Hook,  Dean,  on  James  I.,  365. 

Hooker,  John,  350. 

Hooker,  Richard,  position  of, 
317,  master  of  Temple,  332. 
sketch  of  life,  350  sq.,  con- 
troversy   with    Travers,   351, 

352,  characteristics,  302,  353, 
"Ecclesiastical  Policv,"  352, 

353,  Fuller  aud  Hallara  on 
style,    853,    354,  Walton   on, 

354,  object  and  germ  of  work, 
354  sq.,  sermon  on  Pride.  354, 
on  Episcopacy,  356,  357,  on 
Sacraments,  358,  on  Ceremo- 
nies, 359,  361,  on  Sundays  and 
Holy  Days,  360,  on  Churcli 
Property  and  Consecra  ed 
Places,  360,  361,  on  Scriptures, 
361,  on  Divine  Decrees,  361, 
great  influence,  362. 

Hooker,  Mrs.  Richard,  351,  353. 

Hooper,  Protestantism,  156,  de- 
struction of  altars,  157,  im- 
prisoned, 189,  refnsos  to  lake 
part  in  eucbaristic  discussion, 


202,  tried,  203,  burned,  209, 
reconciliation  with  Ridley,  210, 
211,  Articles,  295. 

Home,  Westminster  Abbey  Con- 
ference, 256,  controversy  with 
Bonner,  269,  Articles,  296. 

Horsey,  murder  of  Hunne,  66. 

Houson,  Bishop,  defends  Mon- 
tagu, 896. 

Howard,  Catharine,  111. 

Howard,  Henry,  execution,  120. 

Howe,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
291. 

Iluber,  Archbishop,  25. 

Hume,  on  Treatment  of  Roman 
Catholics,  849. 

Hunne,  Richard,  murder,  (J6. 

IIuss,  influciif'e  cf  Wyclif,  43. 

Hyde,  Edwaid,  relations  to 
'Laud,  400,  401,  on  Scotch  Pray- 
er-Book,  409,  against  Picsby- 
terian  despotism,  419,  confer- 
ence at  Worcester  lit  use,  443. 

Images,  destruction  of,  97,  Ten 
Articles  on,  104,  Ridley  rec- 
ommends destruction,  125,  or- 
dered removed,  126, 130,  Cran- 
mer's  views,  132,  Guest  on, 
257,  Elizabeth  on.  263,  Jewel's 
challenge,  285,  Eleven  Aiti- 
cles,  801. 

Independents,  325,  827,  at  W^est 
minster  Assembly,  428,  429, 
"  Engagement,"  435,  436,  tol- 
eration for,  443. 

Indulgences,  54. 

Injunctions,  262-264. 

Iunocc:'t  III.,  elects  Langton  to 
archbishopric,  25,  puts  Eng- 
land uneler  interdict,  26,  vic- 
tory over  John,  26,  relations 
to  Magna  Charta,  27,  feudatory 
tribute  from  John,  38. 

Innocent  IV.,  papal  provisions, 
29. 

Innocent  VIII.,  character,  50. 

"Institution  of  a  Christian 
JIan,"  103,  119. 


Index, 


473 


Intenlion,  doctrine  of,  274  sq. 
Investiture,  13.  15,  16. 
Invocation  of  saints.   See  Saints. 
Ireland.     See  Laud, 
Italy,  Reformation  in,  57. 

James  I.,  accession,  363,  Hamp- 
ton Court  conference,  364  sq., 
characteristics,  365,  366,  abso- 
lutist tendencies,  374,  3si7,  Au- 
thorized Version,  376  sq..  Epis- 
copacy in  ScoLland,  379  sq., 
answer  to  Laud,  381,  relations 
to  Abbot,  383,  386,  friendly 
to  Calvinists,  384,  "Book  of 
Sports,"  337,  403,  Synod  of 
Dort,  387,  388.  zeal  for  Cal- 
vinism abatt's,  388,  relations  to 
Laud,  388.  389,  death  and  in- 
fluence, 39  J. 

Jansenists,  adlicrence  to  Augus- 
tine, 343. 

Jerome,  influence  of  Wyclif,  43. 

Jesuits,  Pelagianism  of,  343. 

Jewel,  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  376, 
284,  on  vestments,  379,  28),  on 
scarcity  of  clergy,  281.  impor- 
tance of  work,  333  sq.,  ser- 
mons at  Paul's  Cro?s.  284,  285, 
"  Apology,"  235,  286,  remains 
in  church,  315,  acquaintance 
with  Hooker,  350,  line  of  argu- 
ment, 356,  ceremonies,  359. 

Joan  of  Kent,  143,  144. 

John,  Bishop,  Parker's  consecra- 
tion. 367. 

John,  Cardinal  of  Ciema,  18. 

John,  King,  relations  to  Home, 
35  sq ,  Magna  Charta,  27, 
pays  feudatory  tribute  to  In 
nocent,  38. 

John  of  Gaunt,  relations  to 
Wyclif,  87,  39,  40. 

John,  Roman  abbot  and  pre- 
centor, 6. 

John  VI.,  relations  to  Wilfrid,  8. 

Julius  II.,  on  Alexander  VI.,  51, 
dispensation  for  marriage  of 
Henry  and  Catharine,  71. 


Jusliflcation  by  Faith,  Ten  Arti- 
cles, 104,  Bishop's  book  on, 
100.  288. 

Juxon,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 443. 

Keblc,  on  Hooker,  352,  853,  355, 

857. 
Kidderminster,  Richard,  upholds 

Benefit  of  clergy,  66. 
Kilwardy,  Robert  de,  appointed 

to  Canterbury,  30. 
King,  Bishop  of  London,  divorce 

of  Countess  of  Essex,  386. 
"King's  Book,"  119. 
Kitchin,   Bishop,  263,   Parker's 

consecration,  267. 
Knewstubbs,  at  Hampton  Court 

Conference,  364. 
Knox,  John,  relations  to  English 

reformers,  239, 
Kyme,  Anne,  118. 

Lamb,  consecrated  to  Brechin, 
380. 

Lambert,  Zwingliun  views,  108. 

Lambtth  ArticUs,  343  sq.,  367, 
393. 

Lan  franc,  13,  on  Transubstantia- 
tion.  43. 

Laugden,  Abbot  of,  93. 

Langland,  author  of  "  Piers 
ploughman's  Creed,"  45. 

Langton,  Stephen,  19,  see  of  Can- 
terbury, 25,  excommunicated, 
27. 

Laski,  John.  160,  bard  fate  of  his 
congregation,  193. 

Lasko,  John  tl.    See  Laski. 

Latimer,  Hugh,  suspect,  80, 
preaches  reform,  1U2,  157,  dis- 
sents from  Six  Articles,  109, 
110,  on  abuses  of  Reformation, 
18i),  comniiLted,  193,  eucha- 
ristic  discussions  at  Oxford, 
200-303,  trial  postponed.  213, 
315,  trial,  318  sq  ,  burmd,  220 
sq.,  characteristics,  222,  223. 

Laud,  William,  Scotch  conform- 


474 


Index. 


ity,  381,  relations  to  James, 
388,  389,  395,  recommends 
Montagu  to  appeal  to  king, 
390,  influence  over  Charles, 
891  sq.,  coronation,  392,  life 
sketched,  892  sq.,  principles, 
893  sq.,  relations  to  Williams, 
895,  405,  415,  defends  Mon- 
tagu, 396,  Erastianism,  397, 
Bishop  of  London,  398,  loss  of 
Buckingham,  898,  civil  and 
political  v^ork,  398  sq.,  arch- 
bishop, 400,  relations  to  Hyde, 
400,  401,  refuses  cardinal's  hat, 
402,  "Book  of  Sports,"  402, 
position  of  altar,  4«i28q.,  ritual 
controversy,  405,  400,  on 
wafers.  406.  Transubstantia- 
tion,  406,  work  in  Ireland  and 
Scotland,  406  sq.,  Scotch  Pray- 
er Book,  406  sq.,  action  of 
Convocation,  411,  412,  warned 
by  Sanderson,  413,  attacked 
by  mob,  412,  attack  of  Bering, 
415,  charged  with  high  trea- 
son, 416,  in  Tower,  416,  con- 
sistency, 418,  fright  at  king's 
concessions,  421,  persecuted 
and  insulted,  430,  431,  trial, 
431  sq.,  defence,  431,  432, 
convicted,  432,  beheaded,  433, 
summing  up,  433. 

Lawrence,  Arclibishop,  on  Cran- 
mer  and  Cnlvin,  294. 

Lay  baptism,  287,  366. 

Lechler,  on  Wyclif,  37. 

Lee,  visitor  of  monks,  91,  Six 
Articles.  109. 

Legget,  Bartholomew,  885,  886. 

Leicester,  Earl  of,  ritual  posi- 
tion, 310,  influence  on  Eliza- 
beth, 319,  plot  against  Whit- 
gift,  331. 

Leighton,  visitor  of  monks,  91. 

Lent,  observance  of,  under  Ed- 
ward VI.,  140. 

Leo  X.,  51. 

Leo  XIII.,  on  Anglican  orders, 
274  sq. 


Linacre,  58. 

Lingard,  on  Six  Articles,  110,  on 
lienry  VIII.  and  Catharine 
Parr,  118,  on  relations  between 
Paul  IV.  and  Elizabeth,  250, 
on  Parker's  consecration,  270, 
271,  272,  on  excommunication 
of  Elizabeth,  346,  347. 

Litany,  English  versions  of,  110, 
136,  165,  166. 

Lollards,  44  sq.,  oppose  pilgrim- 
ages, 53.     See  Wyclif. 

London,  visitor  of  monks,  91.  96. 

London.  Synod  of  (1552),  177. 

Long  Parliament.  See  Parlia- 
ment. 

Longer  and  Shorter  Catechisms, 
424. 

Louis  VII.,  sides  against  Becket, 
23. 

Luther  and  Lutherans,  54,  59, 
theses  and  letters,  67,  68,  reply 
to  Henry,  69,  influenc»  of  doc 
trine,  302,  disciple  of  Augus- 
tine, 343. 

Machyn.  diary,  270. 

Magna  Charta,  22,  27. 

Marprelate  controversy,  836  pq. 

Marriage  of  clergy.  See  Celi- 
bacy. 

Marriage  Service.  See  Prayer- 
Book. 

Martin  V.  complains  of  anti- 
papal  statutes,  47,  character, 
50. 

Martin,  royal  commissioner,  216, 
217. 

Martyr,  Peter,  142, 143,  156,  sec- 
ond Prayer-Book,  159.  160, 
roughly  handled,  189,  allowed 
to  depart,  192,  letter  from 
Sampson,  28i),  body  of  wife 
maltreated.  240.  241,  letter  to, 
concerning  Parker's  consecra- 
tion, 270,  271. 

Mary,  Queen,  72,  declared  ille- 
gitimate, 102,  protests  against 
changes,  126,  relation  to  Ref- 


Index. 


475 


ormation,  181,   183,   186   sq., 

198,  accession,  185  sq ,  pro- 
hibits religious  discussion,  188 
sq.,  hatred  of  Cranintr.  191, 
2a9,  crowned,  193,  first  Parlia- 
ment, 193,  divorce  of  Henry 
and  Cathariae  quashed,  194, 
treatment  of  Elizabeth,  194, 
ecclesiastical  chauges,  195, 196, 
spares  Cranmer,  196, 197,  nego- 
tiations with  pope,  197,  pro- 
posed marriage  with  Philip, 
197  sq.,  distasteful  to  people, 

199,  second  Parliament,  199, 
marriage,  202,  new  epoch  in 
English  Church,  203  sq.,  third 
Parliament,  204,  205,  recon- 
ciliation of  England  with 
Home,  204,  205,  persecutions, 
206  sq,,  213  sq.,  241,  effects, 
209.  215  sq..  244  sq.,  number 
burned,  213,  petition  to,  in  be- 
half of  Cranmer  and  otLers, 
213,  214 ;  answer,  214,  prop- 
erty restored  to  Church,  224, 
Cranmer's  degradation,  225 
sq..  reasons  for  zeal,  232,  death 
of  Cranmer,  234  sq.,  defence 
of  Pole,  242.  243.  personal  fail- 
ures, 243  sq.,  death,  244,  vir- 
tues, 245,  relations  to  Eliza- 
beth. 245,  2i7. 

Mary,  sister  of  Henry  VHL,  183, 

Mary,  Queen  of  bcots,  204,  340. 

Mason,  publisher  of  "Lambeth 
Record,"  270. 

Mass.  See  Communion,  Holy  ; 
lieal  Presence,  Transubstantia- 
tion. 

Master,  parish  priest  of  "  Nun  of 
Kent,"  83,  84. 

Matilda,  19. 

Matthew  Paris,  on  papal  provi- 
sions, 29. 

Matthew's  Bible,  106,  283. 

May,  Bishop,  first  Prayer- Book, 
133. 

May,  Dr.,  first  Prayer- Book,  183. 

"  Mayflower,"  837. 


Mayne.  Cuthbert,  death,  347. 

MeJici,  Gijvanui  de,  50. 

Mendicant  Orders.  See  Regular 
Clergy,  Wyclif,  and  under  in- 
dividual titles. 

Mennonites,  298. 

Merrick,  consecrated  Bishop  of 
Bangor  by  Parker,  276. 

Millenariaus,  condemned  in  Arti- 
cles, 297. 

Milton,  against  Episcopacy,  417, 
on  state  of  things  after  expul- 
sion of  bishops,  426,  on  Pres- 
byterians, 442. 

Mirandola,  Pico  della,  57. 

Monasteries,  suppression  of,  90 
sq. 

Monk,  General,  438.  439. 

Montagu,  Richard,  390.  396,  398. 

Montfort,  Simon  dc,  debt  of  Eng- 
lish to,  27. 

More,  Thomas,  58,  79,  80,  on 
"Nun  of  Kent,"  83.  refuses 
oath  to  succession  of  children 
of  Auuc  Boleyn,  84,  animosity 
of  king,  84,  b5,  execution,  85. 

Morgan.  Judge.  199. 

Mortmain,  Statute  of,  31,  sus- 
pended, 206. 

Morton,  Bishop  of  Durham, 
Nag's  Heatl  fable,  269,  on 
Long  Parliament  commission, 
417,  iu  custody,  420. 

Mountague,  Chief  Justice,  183. 

Mountain,  Bishop,  licenses  Sib- 
thorp's  sermon,  397,  removed 
to  York,  398. 

Nag's  Head  fable,  268,  269. 

Neal,  on  Hampton  Court  Confer- 
ence, 867.  on  James,  o8s),  on 
Root  and  Branch  bill.  423. 

Neale,  chaplain  to  Bonner,  prob- 
able author  of  Nag's  Head 
fable,  268. 

"  Necessary  Erudition  of  Any 
Christian  Man,"  119. 

Nicholas  V.,  50. 

Nicholas,  Henry,  829. 


476 


hidex. 


Ncilo,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
31)7. 

Nt'W  Testament.    See  Bible. 

Nicholson,  Zwiu^lian  views,  108. 

Nldd  River,  council  on  (706),  8. 

Noailles.    See  De  Noailles. 

Non-Conformity.  See  Dissent- 
ers. 

Non-juring  bishops,  277,  278. 

Norfolk,  Duke  of,  sent  against 
Pilgrimage  of  Grace,  95,  hatred 
of  Cromwell,  111,  relations  to 
Cranmer,  115,  arrest,  115,  re- 
lations to  Brown,  325. 

Norman  conquest,  effect  of,  on 
Church,  12  sq. 

Northampton,  Council  of,  28. 

Northumberland,  Duke  of,  146, 
recommends  Hooper  for  see  of 
Gloucester,  156,  powc,  182, 
Lady  Jane  Grey,  183,  fall'and 
death,  185,  186. 

Norwich,  Bishop  of,  imprisons 
Brown,  326. 

Nottingham,  Earl  of,  Parker's 
consecration,  270. 

Nowell,  Dean,  286,  290,  291. 

Nun  of  Kent,  83,  84. 

Offa,  of  Mercia,  8. 

Oglethorpe,  Bishop  of  Carlisle, 

251,  262. 
Oldcastle,  Sir  John,  46. 
Orange,  Prince  of,  884. 
Orders.     See  Parker,  Matthew. 
Ordinal,  first,    148  sq.,  second, 

151,  176,  of  Elizabeth,  260,  of 

Exeter,  275. 
Original  sin,  297,  298. 
Ornaments  Rubric,  137, 147,  148, 

258,  455,  456. 
Oswi,    decides    Easter    contro- 
versy, 4. 
Overall,  Dean  of  St.  Paul's,  365, 

369,  Authorized  Version,  377. 
Owen,    John,    intercession    for 

Peacock,  438. 
Oxford,  University  of,  relations 

to  Wyclif,  41, 42, 44,  Lutheran 


doctrines  in,  68,  Cardinal  Col. 
lege,  69,  on  divorce  of  Henry 
and  Catharine,  78,  on  royal  su- 
premacy, 82,  eucharistic  dis- 
cussions at,  201,  202,  burning 
of  bishops  at,  215  sq.,  visita- 
tion under  Pole,  240,  High 
Church  stronghold,  310,  sur- 
renders to  Parliament,  433. 

Papacy,  Pope,  rejection  of  su- 
premacy, 2,  appeals  to,  in  early 
English  Church,  7,  reasons  for 
supremacy,  9-11,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  papal  legate, 
19,  25,  Constitutions  of  Clar- 
endon, 22,  23,  murder  of 
Becket,  24,  case  of  Laagton, 
25  sq.,  Magna  Charta,  27,  sub- 
sidies, 28,  papal  provisions,  i:8, 
29,  38,  34,  Statute  of  Mort- 
main, 31,  "  clericis  laicos,  "32, 
Statute  of  Carlisle,  3.2,  Statute 
of  Pro  visors,  33,  34  sq..  Stat- 
ute of  Prajmuuire,  34,  47, 
Wyclif,  36  sq.,  41,  45,  "  Good 
Parliament, "  39,  papal  schism, 
43,  fifteenth  century,  49  sq., 
English  movement  against  at 
first  political  and  social,  67,  di- 
vorce of  Henry  and  Catharine, 
71  sq.,  76,  78,  policy  of  Crom- 
well, 81,  Ten  Ai  ticks,  103  sq., 
irregular  Convocation  of  Yoik, 
105,  Six  Articles,  108  sq.,  113, 
127,  Cranmer  attacked,  113  sq., 
reasons  for  rejecting  suprenja- 
cy,  152,  Eleven  Articles,  301. 
See  Clement  VIL,  Gregory 
XL,  Pius  H..  Pius  IV.,  Pius 
v.,  Martin  V.,  Paschal  IL, 
Urban  V.,  Paul  II.,  Paul  III., 
Paul  IV.,  Sixtus  IV..  William 
the  Conqueror,  William  Ruf  us, 
Henry  I.,  Stephen,  Edward  I., 
Edward  IL,  Edward  HI.,  Ed- 
ward VL,  Henry  VIIL,  Mary, 
Elizabeth,  Cranmer,  Parker, 
Royal  Supremacy. 


Index, 


477 


"  Paraphrase"  of  Erasmus,  126. 

Pardons,  298. 

Paris,  Matthew,  on  papal  provi- 
sions, 29. 

Paris,  University  of,  on  divorce 
of  Henry  and  Catharine,  76. 

Parker.  Matthew,  Prayor-Book 
revision,  252,  257,  consccra 
tion,  265  sq.,  charaeterifetics, 
265,  2Gj,  objections  to  valid- 
ity, 2^3  sq.,  consecrates  other 
bishops,  5i76,  284,  dimcnlties 
of  position,  277  sq.,  280  sq., 
reply  to  Heath,  278,  firmness 
on  Catholic  character  of 
Cliurch  of  England,  282,  299, 
against  Pius  IV.,  279,  346, 
Nowoll's  Catechism,  290.  291, 
revision  of  Articles,  oOl  sq  , 
on  ritual  irregularities,  30G, 
on  Advertisements,  308,  death, 
817,  rebukes  Elizabeth,  317. 

Parker,  Mrs.  Matthew,  281,  282. 

Parkhurst,  Bishop  of  Norwich, 
315,  ordered  to  repress 
"  Prophesy ings."  320,  321. 

Parliament,  "Good,"  39,  Long, 
413,  414  sq.,  dissolves,  439, 
Short,  410,  411,  Rump,  433, 
437,  438,  439,  convention,  441 
sq.,  444  sq.,  448,  second  of 
Charles  II.,  447  sq.  For  oth- 
ers, see  England,  Church  of. 

Parr,  Catharine,  114,  accusation, 
116,  defence,  117,  118,  marries 
Saymour,  145. 

Parsons,  Jesuit  missionary,  347, 
348. 

Paschal  II.,  complains  of  want 
of  respect  of  English  Church, 
16. 

Paschasius  Radbertus,  on  Tran- 
substantiation,  43,  143. 

Paul  II  ,  character,  50. 

Paul  III.,  confers  hat  on  Fisher, 
85. 

Paul  IV„  relations  to  Pole,  242, 
243,  to  Elizabeth,  250. 

Peacock,  charges  against,  438. 


Pecchara,  Archbishop,  contro- 
versy witli  Edward  I.,  31. 

Pecock,  on  Pilgrimages,  54. 

Peito,  made  legate,  243. 

Pelagius,  Pe'.agianism,  298,  343. 

Penance,  defined  in  Ten  Articles, 
103,  Cranmer's  views,  132. 

Pcnry,  Marprelato  controversy, 
333. 

"  Perpetual  Government  of 
Christ's  Church,"  341. 

Peter's  Pence,  ^,  13. 

Petrarch,  56. 

Philibert,  suitor  to  Elizabeth, 
246. 

Philip  II..  197  sq.,  lands  in  Eng- 
land. 346.  347,  Spanish  wealth 
brought  into  England,  203,  in- 
tercedes for  Elizabeth  and 
Courtenay,  203,  204,  connec- 
tion with  persecutions,  212,  on 
Continent  at  time  of  Cranmer's 
degradation,  229,  desertion  of 
Mary,  244,  urges  Philibert  on 
Elizabeth,  246,  relations  to 
Elizabeth,  250,  St.  Bartholo- 
mew, 314. 

Philpot,  Archdeacon  of  Winches- 
ter, defends  Catharine,  196. 

Pico  della  Mirandola,  57. 

"  Piers  Ploughman's  Creed,"  45. 

Pilgrimage  of  Grace,  95,  101. 

Pilgrimages,  53,  54,  107. 

Pilgrim  Fathers,  827. 

Pius  II.,  50. 

Pius  IV.,  279,  346. 

Pius  v.,  excommunication  of 
Elizabeth,  346,  847. 

Pole,  Cardinal,  on  Royal  Su- 
premacy, 86,  87,  proposed 
legateship  opposed  by  Gardi- 
ner, 197,  legate,  204,  205, 
characteristics,  207,  208,  244, 
policy  concerning  burnings, 
213,  attempts  at  reform,  224, 
225,  relations  to  Cranmer, 
225,  consecration,  240,  papal 
charges  against,  242,  243, 
death,  244. 


4/8 


Index. 


Politian,  57. 

Poole,  Bishop,  262,  Parker's  con- 
secruiion.  267. 

"Poor  Priests,"  43. 

Poynet,  Bishop  of  Winchester, 
succeeds  Gardiner,  155,  290. 

Prremunire,  Statute  of,  34,  47, 
81.  207,  243,  252,  255. 

Praver-Book,  first,  122,  133  sq., 
l47  sq  ,  177, 178,  points  of  dif- 
fercnce  from  one  now  in  use, 
136,  137,  ritual  directions,  187, 
138,  Act  of  Uniformity.  138 
sq. ,  opposed,  141,  second  Book, 
158  sq.,  163  sq.,  177,  178, 
Elizabethan,  252,  257,  286, 
changes  under  James,  369, 
449,  Scotcli,  406  sq.,  Ameri- 
can, 408,  use  abolislied,  426, 
427,  under  Presbyterians,  442 
sq..  Savoy  Conference,  444  sq., 
changes  under  Charles  I.,  449 
sq. 

Prayers  for  the  dead,  Cranmer 
subscribes  to  doctrine,  233, 
under  Elizabeth,  257. 

Predestinailon,  343  sq.,  400.  See 
Presbyterians. 

Prcbyterians.  309,  316,  first 
Presbytery  in  England,  317, 
325,  offspring  of  English  Puri- 
tanism, 327,  Bancroft  against, 
340,  iu  Scotland,  380,  Root  and 
Branch  bjll,  417,  418,  West- 
minster Assembly,  424  sq., 
divisions,  428  sq.,  after  death 
of  Charles  I.,  435  sq.,  "  En- 
gagement," 435, 436,  hopes  on 
Charles  11. 's  acce-ssion,  441, 
despotism,  441,  conference  at 
Worcester  House,  443,  Savoy 
Conference,  444  sq.,  second 
Parliament  of  Chailes  II.,  447 
sq. 

Pride's  Purge,  439. 

Processions,  257. 

Proctor,  "  History  of  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,"  451, 

Prophesyings,  320,  321. 


Provisors,  Statute  of,  33,  34,  30. 

Prynne,  in  pillory,  415,  treatment 
of  Laud,  431,  on  Laud's  de- 
fence, 432. 

Purgatory,  79,  defined  in  Ten 
Articles,  103,  Bishop's  book 
on,  106,  Cranmer  subscribes 
to,  233,  Article  on,  298. 

Puritans,  277,  281,  287,  311  sq., 
314  sq.,  318,  319,  346  sq.. 
Separatists  and  Brownists,  325 
sq.,  in  Church,  328  sq.,  833 
sq.,  839  sq.,  Marprelatc  contro- 
versy, 336 sq.,  Sabbatarianism, 
341,  342,  low  ebb  at  death  of 
Elizabeth,  340,  under  James, 
363 sq.,  867  sq.,  387  sq.,  under 
Bancroft,  373,  under  Abbot, 
384  sq..  under  Charles  L,  391 
sq.,  410  sq.,  position  of  altar, 
402  sq..  Long  Parliament,  414 
sq.,  lloot  and  Branch  bill,  417, 
418,  Grand  Remonstrance,  419, 
tyranny,  426  sq.,  divisions, 
428,  429,  after  death  of  Chariea 
I.,  435  sq.,  "Engagement," 
435,  436,  conference  at  Worces- 
ter House,  443,  Savoy  Confer- 
ence, 443  sq.,  second  Parlia- 
ment of  Charles  II.,  447  sq. 

Purge,  Pride's,  439. 

Pym,  attacks  Arminians.  398, 
grievances,  410,  charged  with 
treason,  421. 

Quartodecimans,  British  Church 
not  on  side  of,  4. 

Radbertus,  on  Eucharist,  43, 143. 

Ralph,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 16,  17. 

Ratranius,  ou  Eucharist,  43,  143. 

Real  Presence,  defined  in  Ten 
Articles,  103,  in  Six  Articles, 
109,  controversy,  141  sq., 
second  Prayer-Book,  173,  174, 
175,  Black  Rubric,  456  sq.  See 
Communion,  Holy  ;  Transub* 
stantiation,  JeweL 


Index. 


479 


Recusancy  Laws,  847  sq.,  389. 

Reformatio  legum  cccksiastico- 
rum,  314. 

Reformation,  Anglican.  See  An- 
glican Reformation. 

Reformation,  continental.  See 
Germany,  Swiss  Reformation. 

"  Reformation  Settlement,"  122. 

Reginald,  sub-prior  of  Canter- 
bury, 25. 

Regular  clergy,  10,  80.  51  sq., 
opposition  of  Wyclif,  37,  52, 
suppression  of  houses,  90  sq. 

Religious  houses.  See  Regular 
Clergy. 

Remonstrance,  Grand,  419. 

Renaissance,  56  sq. 

Restoration,  440,  441  sq. 

Reynolds,  Dr.,  Ilampton  Court 
Conference,  364, 367,  conforms, 
368,  Authorized  Version,  377. 

Rheims  New  Testament,  376. 

Rich,  Lady.  393. 

Richard  le  Grand,  28. 

Richardson,  Chief  Justice,  402. 

Ridley,  recommenda  destruction 
of  images,  125,  157,  first  Pray- 
er-Book,  133,  views  on  Eucha- 
rist, 143,  Joan  of  Kent,  144, 
succeeds  Bonner,  155,  relations 
to  Hooper,  156,  communion 
tables,  158,  influences  Cran- 
mer,  161,  222,  Articles,  177, 
Eucharistic  discussion  at  Ox- 
ford, 200-203,  reconciled  with 
Hooper,  210,  211,  trial  post- 
poned, 213.  215,  trial,  218  sq., 
burned,  220  sq.,  characteris- 
tics, 222,  influence  on  Edward, 
222 

Ritual,  141,  263,  805  sq.,  367, 455 
sq.  See  Laud,  Vestments, 
Ornaments  Rubric. 

Robert  de  Kilwardy,  appointed 
to  Canterbury,  30. 

Robert  of  Normandy,  19. 

Rogers,  John,  Matthew's  Bible, 
106,  refuses  to  take  part 
iu    Eucharistic    controversy. 


203,  tried,  208,  burned,   209, 

289. 
Roman  Catholics  in  England  iu 

Elizabeth's    reign,     346    sq.. 

Gunpowder  Plot,  375,    under 

James,  388  sq. 
Rome,  Church  of.    See  Papacy, 

Pope. 
Root  and  Branch  bill,  417,  418, 

423. 
Rouse,  Francis,  398. 
Royal  Supremacy,  66,  67,  82,  86, 

87, 124,  216,  217,  254, 263.     See 

under  individual  monarchs. 
Runnymede,  27. 

Sabbatarianism,  341,  342,  Hooker 
in  opposition,  360,  "  Book  of 
Sports,"  387,  402. 

Sacraments,  298,  Hooker's  view, 
358.  See  under  individual 
titles. 

St.  Bartholomew  massacre,  314. 

St.  Maur,  Benedictines  of,  52. 

St.  Quentin,  242. 

Saints,  position  of  Ten  Articles 
toward,  104,  of  first  Praycr- 
Book,  137,  reason  for  rejecting 
invocation,  152,  Cranmcr  sub- 
scribes to  doctrine,  233,  con- 
demned in  Articles,  298. 

Salisbury,  Countess  of,  behead- 
ed, 112. 

Sampson,  Dr.,  defence  of  Roval 
Supremacy,  87,  to  Peter  Mar- 
tyr on  Parker's  consecration, 
271,  on  ritual,  280. 

Sancroft,  Prayer-Book  revision, 
457. 

Sanders,  burned,  209,  210. 

Sanderson,  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
warns  Laud,  412,  Restoration 
bishop,  443,  Prayer-Book  revi- 
sion, 452. 

Sandys,  consecrated  by  Parker, 
276,  at  convocation  of  1563, 
287,  work  on  Bible,  290,  re- 
mains iu  Church,  315,  Bishop's 
Bible,  376. 


48o 


Index. 


Sarum  Missal,  128,  13G,  pontift- 
cal,  149. 

Savile,  Authorized  Version  Bi- 
ble, 377. 

Savonarola,  monastic  reforms, 
62. 

Savoy  Conference    M4  sq. 

Sawtre,  William,  ^iJ. 

Saxon  invasion,  3. 

Scory ,  Bishop  of  Chichester,  1 83, 
•Parker's  consecration,  267, 268, 
269. 

Scotch  Prayer-Book.  See  Pray- 
cr-Book, 

Scotland,  attempted  papal  suze- 
rainty over,  33,  reintroduction 
of  Episcopacy  into,  379  sq., 
"The  Tables,"  409,  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant,  409, 
General  Assembly,  410,  Charles 
yields,  418.  See  England, 
Church  of  ;  Laud. 

Scott,  Walter,  picture  of  James 
I.,  365. 

Secular  clergy,  10,  in  fifteenth 
century,  51. 

Solborne,  Lord,  on  Advertise- 
ments, 309. 

Separatists,  325  sq. 

Seymour,  Earl  of  Hertfort.  See 
Somerset. 

Seymour,  Jane,  102. 

Seymour,  Thomas,  145. 

Shakespeare,  picture  of  Cranmer, 
113. 

Shaxton,  dissents  from  Six  Arti- 
cles, 109,  110,  preaches  at  exe- 
cution of  Anne  Askew,  118. 

Sheldon,  Bishop  of  London,  443, 
445. 

Shirley,  Professor,  on  Lollards, 
44. 

Short  Parliament.  See  Parlia- 
ment. 

Shrewsbury,  Earl  of,  183. 

Sibthorp,  sermon  on  divine  right 
of  kings,  397. 

Six  Articles,  Statute  of,  108  sq., 
modified,  113,  repealed,  127. 


Sixtus  IV.,  50. 

Skip,  Bishop,  first  Prayer-Book, 
133. 

"  Smectymnus,"  417. 

Smith,  Dr.  Miles,  on  Authorized 
Version,  377. 

Smith,  Dr.,  preacher  at  execu- 
tion of  Latimer  and  Ridley, 
221. 

Solemn  Leairue  and  Covenant, 
409,  412,  424,  425,  435. 

Somerset,  Duke  of,  120, 123,  Pro- 
tector, 124,  changes,  124,  royal 
visitation,  125,  126,  fall,  145, 
116,  178,  House,  179. 

Somerset  House,  179. 

Spain,  war  with  France,  242. 
See  Philip  IL 

Sparkes,  Hampton  Court  Confer- 
cncc  364« 

"Sports,  Book  of,"  387,  402, 
410. 

Spotswood,  consecrated  to  Glas- 
gow, 880 

Standish,  Henry,  defends  Act  on 
Benefit  of  Clergy,  66. 

Stapleton,  on  Parker,  268. 

Star  Chamber  abolished,  419. 

Stephen,  King,  policy  toward 
Rome,  20. 

Stigand,  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury, 11. 

Story,  royal  commissioner,  216. 

Strafford,  bill  against,  416,  death, 
418. 

Succession  Act,  84,  183. 

Sudely,  Lord,  145. 

Suffolk,  Duke  of,  182,  rebellion, 
199,  death,  199. 

Supererogation,  works  of,  298. 

Supremacy,  Act  of,  262,  291. 

"  Supreme  Governor,"  255. 

"  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church," 
255. 

Surry,  Earl  of,  execution,  120. 

Sutton,  Thomas,  386. 

Sweden,  King  of,  proposes  mar- 
riage to  Elizabetli,  246. 

Swiss  Reformation  and  influence 


Index, 


481 


on  England,  176,  239.  290, 295. 
298,  309,  316,  329. 

Tables,  The,  409. 

Tailour  dissents  from  Six  Arti- 
clea,  109. 

Taylor,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  first 
Prayer-Book,  188,  at  Mary's 
first  Parliament,  193. 

Taylor,  incumbent  of  Hadley, 
burned,  210,  212. 

Ten  Articles,  103  sq. 

Testa.  William  de,  32. 

Theobald,  inhibited  by  Stephen, 
20. 

Theodore  of  Tarsus,  5  sq. 

Thirlby,  Bishop,  first  Prayer- 
Book,  133,  relations  to  Cran- 
mer,  225  sq.,  treatment  under 
Elizabeth,  263. 

Thirty  nine  Arlicles.  See  Arti- 
cles. 

Thomas,  St.     See  Becket. 

Thornton,  Bishop  of  Dover,  91, 
190. 

Thurston,  consecrated  to  York 
by  Calixtus  11..  17.  18. 

Transubstantiation,  attacked  by 
Wyclif,  38.  43.  44,  109,  in 
King's  Book,  119,  controver- 
sies, 142,  reasons  for  rejecting, 
152,  Cranmer's  views,  161, 162, 
convocation  under  Mary  on, 
196,  reformers  burned  for 
denying,  209  sq.,  219,  220, 
Cranmer's     submission,     233, 

-  Jewel's  challenge.  285.  adora- 
tion condemned  in  Articles. 
298,  Laud  charged  with  views 
on,  406,  Black  liubric.  456  sq. 

Trask.  reply  to  "Book  of 
Sports,"  387. 

Travers,  "  Book  of  Discipline," 
329,  candidate  for  mastership 
of  Temple,  332,  reader  at  Tem- 

gle,  351,  352,  controversy  with 
[ooker.  352,  354. 
Treason  Act,  84. 
Trent,  Council  of,  155. 


"  Triers,"  436,  437. 

Tulchan  bishops,  880. 

Tunstall,  Bishop  of  London,  tries 
Bilney  and  Arthur,  70,  guid- 
ance of  Edward,  120,  impris- 
oned, 158,  no  burnings  under, 
213.  treatment  under  Eliza- 
beth, 262,  Parker's  consecra- 
tion, 267. 

Turberville,  Bishop,  262. 

Tyndale,  translation  of  New 
Testament,  69,  70,  106.  288. 

Udal,  Marprelate  controversy, 
338. 

Ultramontanes,  865. 

Uniformity,  Act  of.  See  Act  of 
Uniformity. 

Universities,  support  convoca- 
tion under  Elizabeth,  255. 
See  Cambridge,  Oxford. 

Usher,  Bishop,  on  Long  Parlia- 
ment commission,  417,  defence 
of  Episcopacy,  417. 

Vane,  Sir  Harry,  425,  an  Inde- 
pendent, 428. 

Verbal  Treason  Act,  84. 

Vesey,  Dr.,  on  rights  of  crown, 
66. 

Vestments,  170,  173,  257,  258, 
261.279,  280,  805  sq.,  870. 

Via  Media.  104,  282. 

Vitalian,  Pope,  sends  Theodore 
to  England,  5. 

Von  Hutten,  59. 

Wafers,  406. 

Walker,  "Sufferings  of  the 
Clergy,"  430. 

Walton,  on  Hooker,  852,  853, 
354.  bishop.  443. 

Warham,   Archbishop   of   Can- 
terbury, 64,  on  spread  of  here 
sies,  68,  relations  to  divorce  of 
Henry  and  Catharine,  73. 

Warwick.  See  Northumberland. 

Wentworth,  Protestant  position, 
313. 


482 


Index. 


Westcott,  on  English  Bible,  879. 

Westminster  Abbey,  rebuilt  by 
Edward  the  Confessor,  11. 

"Westminster  Assembly,  424  sq. 

Westminster,  Synod  at  (1125),  18. 

Weston  prolocutor  at  Oxford 
disputations,  201. 

"  Whip  with  Six  Strings,"  110. 

Whitaker,  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity  at  Cambridge,  343, 
344. 

Whitby,  conference  at  (664  a.d.), 
4. 

White,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  trial 
of  Ridley  and  Latimer,  218  sq. 

Whitgift,  Archbishop  on  Adver- 
tisements, 308,  against  Cart- 
wright,  316,  317,  sketch  of  life, 
825,  made  archbishop,  825, 
strong  position  against  Puri- 
tans, 329  sq..  Twenty-four 
Articles,  331,  dispute  concern- 
ing mastership  of  Temple,  332, 
effect  of  policy  on  Church, 
833  sq.,  canon  on  discipline, 
834,  intercedes  for  Udal  and 
Cartwright,  338,  against  Sab- 
batarianism, 342,  Calvinistic 
tendency,  343,  345,  line  of  argu- 
ment, 356,  at  Hampton  Court 
Conference,  Ji64,  death  and 
character,  369,  debt  to,  370, 
sermons,  370. 

Why  ting,  Robert,  judicial  mur- 
der, 98,  99. 

Wightraan,  Edward,  386. 

Wilcox,  admonition  to  Parlia- 
ment, 316. 

Wilfrid,  Bishop  of  York,  on 
Easter,  4,  collision  with  Theo- 
dore, 5,  appeal  to  Rome,  6, 
imprisoned,  6,  interest  of  case, 
7,  missionary  work,  7,  further 
controversy,  8,  death,  8. 

William  of  Corbeil,  18. 

William  Rnfus,  14. 

William  the  Conqueror,  relations 
to  Rome,  12  sq. 


William  the  Silent,  348. 

Williams,  John,  Dean  of  West- 
minster, 388,  892,  relations  to 
Laud,  395,  396,  405.  415,  on 
Long  Parliament  commission, 
417,  protest  of  expelled  bish- 
ops, 420,  accused  of  treason, 
420. 

Winchelsea,  Archbishop,  contro- 
versy with  Edward,  32. 

Wolsey,  Thomas,  power,  64, 
condemns  Lutheran  doctnnes, 
68,  virtues,  69,  legate,  €9,  car- 
dinal's college,  69,  relations  to 
divorce  of  Henry  and  Catha- 
rine, 72  sq.,  fall,  75. 

Worms,  Concordat  of.  Investi- 
ture and  Homage  settlement, 
16. 

Wren,  Prayer-Book  revision, 
450. 

Wriothesley,  Chancellor,  120, 
123. 

Wtlrtemberg,  Conference  of ,  302. 

Wyatt,  Sir  Thcmas,  rebellion, 
199,  recantation,  208. 

Wyclif,  John,  36  gq.,  88-41, 
commissioner  at  Bruges,  89, 
"  Good  Parliament,"  39,  sum- 
moned for  heresies,  40,  bulls 
of  Gregory  XL,  41,  against 
papal  tributes,  41,  reply  to 
bulls,  42,  to  bishops,  42,  trans- 
lation of  Bible,  42,  attacks 
Transubstantiation,  43,  theses 
condemned  at  Blackfriars,  44, 
close  of  life  and  influence,  44, 
45.  on  state  of  clergy,  51. 

York,  relations  to  Canterbury, 
17,  19,  irregular  convocation 
of,  105,  convocation  of  1604, 
371. 

Young,  Bishop  of  St.  David's, 
276. 

Zwingli,  view  of  Eucharist,  143. 
See  Swiss  Reformation. 


